by the plaintiff to the defendant. Section 48.151, Florida Statutes, delineates another method of service of process. Notably, however, by its terms, it does not apply to substituted service or process on nonresidents. § 48.151(2), Fla. Stat. (2012). Based on these statutory provisions, Appellee had two choices to perfect service on Appellant — either perfect substituted service under section 48.161, Florida Statutes, or perfect actual service. In this case, Appellee did not send “notice of service and a copy of the process” to Appellant by certified or registered mail, as required by section 48.161(1), Florida Statutes. Therefore, process was not perfected and the trial court lacked jurisdiction. See Pelycado Onroerend Goed B.V. v. Ruthenberg, 635 So.2d 1001, 1005 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) (<HOLDING>). REVERSED with instructions to withdraw the
holding that a superior court could not exercise its original jurisdiction under article iv section 6 over a challenge to a tax decision where the party failed to strictly or substantially comply with statutory procedural requirements holding a trial court lacks jurisdiction when a party fails to strictly comply with the statutes regarding service holding that a court lacks jurisdiction when the issues in a case are no longer live holding that plain error review applies when a party fails to raise a claim before the district court holding appellate court lacks jurisdiction if party does not preserve claim by first raising it before trial court