In the Matter of a Mail Dispute Between

DORIS E. SHYDA
and
SIGMUND SHYDA JR.
P.S. Docket No.  MD 05-58

APPEARANCE FOR DISPUTANT DORIS E. SHYDA:
D. Holbrook Duer, Esq.
Byler, Goodley, Winkle & Hertrick, P.C.
363 W. Roseville Road
ancaster, PA  17601-3145

APPEARANCE FOR DISPUTANT SIGMUND SHYDA JR.:
George E. Christianson, Esq.
Christianson Meyer
411 Chestnut Street
Lebanon, PA  17042-6142

INITIAL DECISION

            This mail dispute has been docketed pursuant to Postal Operations Manual (POM 9, July 2002) Section 616.21, which requires the Chief Field Counsel to forward certain unresolved mail disputes to the Judicial Officer for resolution.  The mail in dispute is that containing the name Shyda’s Gun Shop, addressed to P.O. Box 749, Lebanon, PA 17042-0749, and mail addressed to Sigmund Shyda, Jr. and Shyda’s Gun Shop at 1635 S. Lincoln Avenue, Lebanon, PA 17042-7528.  The Lebanon Postmaster is currently holding the mail.

             Both parties filed sworn written statements, as required by the Rules of Practice, 39 C.F.R. §965.5.  Doris Shyda also filed some additional documents.  The following findings of fact are based on all the material submitted by the parties, including the material forwarded by the United States Postal Service Law Department, Philadelphia office.

FINDINGS OF FACT

            1.  For many years disputants Sigmund and Doris Shyda were married and resided at 1635 S. Lincoln Avenue in Lebanon, Pennsylvania.  They also operated businesses at that address.  Sigmund’s business was called Shyda’s Gun Shop. Doris’ business was Shyda’s Shoe and Clothing Barn.[1]  (Sigmund Shyda statement; Doris Shyda statement).

            2.  The Shydas were divorced on May 13, 2004.  Under the division of the marital assets listed in the Final Decree, Doris received the house and real estate at 1635 S. Lincoln Avenue.  The Decree also stated that Sigmund “shall proceed to dissolve Shyda’s Gun Shop,” but would continue to operate the business until all assets and inventory were sold.  Upon dissolution of the business, Doris was to pay a specified sum of money to Sigmund.  (Decree attached to Doris Shyda statement as Ex. C).

            3.  On June 24, 2004, Sigmund rented P.O. Box 749 and directed the post office that any mail addressed to him at 1635 S. Lincoln Avenue be forwarded to P.O. Box 749.  In accordance with this direction, some of the mail forwarded to him included the name Shyda’s Gun Shop as well as his own name.  (Sigmund Shyda statement; Law Department forwarding letter, Postmaster’s March 15, 2005 letters attached).

            4.  Sigmund terminated the operation of Shyda’s Gun Shop in August 2004 (Sigmund Shyda statement).

            5.  In accordance with the Decree, the house and real estate at 1635 S. Lincoln Avenue were conveyed to Doris by deed on November 11, 2004.  (Deed attached to Doris Shyda statement as Ex. D).

            6.  On November 3, 2004, Brian Shyda, son of Sigmund and Doris, incorporated a business called B. Shyda, Inc., and filed a fictitious name registration for the name Shyda’s Gun Shop, with its place of business at 1635 S. Lincoln Avenue.  (Doris Shyda statement, Exs. A and B).

            7.  In March 2005, Doris Shyda complained, through the office of her Congressman, that mail addressed to Shyda’s Gun Shop should not be delivered to Sigmund’s post office box.  On March 15, 2005, the Lebanon Postmaster began holding the mail, pending resolution of this mail dispute.  (Law Department forwarding letter, Postmaster’s March 15, 2005 letters attached).

DECISION

            Doris Shyda argues that Sigmund no longer has any ownership interest, or any other legal interest, in the name Shyda’s Gun Shop.  Therefore, she concludes, any mail addressed to Shyda’s Gun Shop should be delivered to the address at which the business is operating - 1635 S. Lincoln Avenue.

            Sigmund Shyda argues that Post Office Box 749 is his personal box and anything addressed there belongs to him.  Also, he contends that any mail addressed to him by name at 1635 S. Lincoln Avenue should go to him.

            One of the principles governing resolution of mail disputes is that mail should be delivered as intended by the senders.  In this case there is no direct evidence of any sender’s intent, but the fact that Sigmund ceased operating Shyda’s Gun Shop in August 2004 after the inventory and assets were sold in accordance with the Final Decree, and the fact that B. Shyda Inc. has been operating the business of that same name at 1635 S. Lincoln Avenue since November, 2004 makes it likely that current senders of mail addressed to Shyda’s Gun Shop would intend for B. Shyda, Inc. to receive it.  Even Sigmund Shyda’s sworn statement says that some of the mail he has received deals with “purchases which they [his son and former wife] made.”

            Mr. Shyda’s reliance on P.O. Box 749 being “his” box is misplaced.  The Postal Service owns the box, which was rented by Mr. Shyda.  The issue here is not who the box belongs to, but who is entitled to delivery of mail intended for Shyda’s Gun Shop, no matter how it is addressed.  One might argue that any mail addressed to Box 749 must be intended for Sigmund because only people he gave that address to would be sending mail there.  That might have been true of Shyda’s Gun Shop customers for a time in 2004, but it is also true that some of those customers who still intend to deal with the current business may not be aware that the business has changed hands and that Box 749 is no longer its current business address.  This applies only to mail addressed to Shyda’s Gun Shop.  Clearly, Sigmund is entitled to receive any other mail addressed to P.O. Box 749, and there appears to be no dispute about that.

            As for mail addressed to both Sigmund Shyda and Shyda’s Gun Shop at 1635 S. Lincoln Avenue, again the determining factor is not who owns the property there, but rather who the mail is intended for.  For the same reason as stated above, mail that contains the name Shyda’s Gun Shop should be delivered to B. Shyda, Inc.  This is not a case of two people operating businesses of the same, or similar, names, and the intent of the senders cannot be determined.  In such cases we have awarded the mail to the person who first established use of the name.  In this case, Sigmund is no longer operating a business and has not since August 2004.

            What is not entirely clear from this record is whether Doris Shyda is authorized to speak for B. Shyda, Inc.  The corporate documents (see Finding #6) do not show that she has any connection to B. Shyda, Inc., or to Shyda’s Gun Shop.  Based on Sigmund Shyda’s statement, however, and earlier correspondence between the attorneys representing the parties, I find the record sufficiently clear to conclude that Doris Shyda is acting in concert with Brian Shyda in this matter.

           This decision deals only with delivery of the mail.  It does not determine ownership of the contents of the mail and does not attempt to resolve any underlying disputes between the parties.  If Doris or Brian Shyda receives mail that is intended for Sigmund Shyda, it is their responsibility to forward that mail.  If either party obtains a court order directing delivery of the mail, postal regulations provide that the mail will be delivered according to such an order.  POM §616.3.

            The Judicial Officer should issue an Order to the Lebanon, Pennsylvania Postmaster that the disputed mail should be delivered as directed by Doris and/or Brian Shyda.  Any other mail addressed to P.O. Box 749 should be delivered as addressed, and any mail addressed only to Sigmund Shyda at 1635 S. Lincoln Avenue should be forwarded to Sigmund Shyda.

                                                                                    Bruce R. Houston
                                                                                    Chief Administrative Law Judge

[1] It is not clear whether Shyda’s Shoe and Clothing Barn is still an active business, but that is not critical to the decision in this case.