Epstein Secrets

elief upon by the Court in reaching its conclusion may suffice for natural persons, the Court is asked to reconsider that decision in recognition of New York's specific instructions for service of process on corporations. The affidavit of service of Plaintiff's process server states that he delivered a copy

06, 1408 (3d Cir. 1991). In its Memorandum Opinion dated May 16, 2011, however, the Court stated: C. The Court Will Not Dismiss the Matter Based on Fancelli's Defense of 3 See Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 326-27 (1989) See Leuthner v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Northeastern Pa., 454 F.3d 120 (3d

acceptance of Fancelli's obligations arising from the Purchase Order. In short, the benefits due Molyneux were accepted and approved by Molyneux. If Fancelli satisfied its obligation to Molyneux under the Purchase Order, then these is no unfulfilled "promised performance" to be enforced by Plaintiffs, as

th the performance of our agreement relating to the Office Pavilion, Epstein and I agreed that Studio would contract with Fancelli Paneling, Inc., a New York corporation ("Fancelli"), to fabricate, stain, finish, deliver and install the Library Cabinetry for the benefit of Epstein and LSJ. Fancelli holds

as to be properly installed on Little Saint James Island, and the staining and finishing were to be completed. 8. Between May 2009 and March 2010, Fancelli proceeded to install the Library Cabinetry on Little St. James Island. As of the date of this Affidavit, however, Fancelli has failed to fully comp

celli holds itself out as skilled in intricate wood sculpting and specializing in the reproduction of fine antique cabinetry and woodwork. In fact, Fancelli's website advertises that Fancelli's "[learn of artisans, sculptors and cabinet makers uphold the tradition and carry on the sophisticated art of fi

th the performance of our agreement relating to the Office Pavilion, Epstein and I agreed that Studio would contract with Fancelli Paneling, Inc., a New York corporation ("Fancelli"), to fabricate, stain, finish, deliver and install the Library Cabinetry for the benefit of Epstein and LSJ. Fancelli holds

as to be properly installed on Little Saint James Island, and the staining and finishing were to be completed. 8. Between May 2009 and March 2010, Fancelli proceeded to install the Library Cabinetry on Little St. James Island. As of the date of this Affidavit, however, Fancelli has failed to fully comp

celli holds itself out as skilled in intricate wood sculpting and specializing in the reproduction of fine antique cabinetry and woodwork. In fact, Fancelli's website advertises that Fancelli's "[learn of artisans, sculptors and cabinet makers uphold the tradition and carry on the sophisticated art of fi

hat the whole of this dispute blossoms from an agreement made in New York between Plaintiff Epstein (wherever he was residing in 2005) and Molyneux (New York), then an agreement between Molyneux and Fancelli (New York). It is respectfully submitted that the law of the State of New York will be operative t

ated to conduct purposely directed at the forum state. Id. Defendant maintains that this Court lacks specific jurisdiction over it as well, because Fancelli does not have sufficient minimum contacts with the Virgin Islands to support the exercise of jurisdiction consistent with due process. See Int'l Sho

e and as may be developed through discovery. The reservation of rights was just that. V. CONCLUSION Plaintiffs Amended Complaint against Defendant Fancelli must be dismissed, with prejudice, for all, or any of the foregoing reasons. WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to gr

t the better and proper venue for this action is New York because most of the people with information or knowledge of these events reside in France, New York, and Italy, and because most of the documents relevant to this cause are located in those regions. For the reasons that follow, the Court will deny

and that venue is improper.' e Court finds that Fancelli conducted business and contracted to supply services or things in 's Territory. Therefore, Fancelli is subject to the Court's jurisdiction. In addition, the Court ds that Plaintiffs have pleaded a sufficient claim for breach of a third-party benefi

Amended Complaint, arguing, among other things, that Plaintiffs' service of process was insufficient that the Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Fancelli; that Plaintiffs do not state a laim for relief; that Plaintiffs have failed to join a necessary party; and that venue is improper.' e Court finds

r confirms, under oath, that Fancelli Paneling, Inc. was served with the summons and the FAC at its business address located at 24 East 64th Street, New York, NY 10021, in care of its president, Mr. Jean Pierre Fancelli, through Mr. Christian Barthod who verified to the process server that he worked at Fa

to Mr. Jean Pierre Fancelli. 5 In addition, Defendant specifically informed Plaintiffs' counsel, Darren lndyke, that because of limitations with Mr. Fancelli's ability to communicate in English, Mr. lndyke should communicate with Mr. Fancelli through Mr. Barthod . Pl. Ex. 3 Thus, Mr. Barthod has been pre

Ex. 4. In support of its argument for insufficient service of process, Defendant asserts that the ...Summons and Complaint (sic) were delivered to Fancelli's office in New York on or about November 29, 2010 and left at that location with an unauthorized employee of Fancelli Paneling, Inc." However, Mr.

th the performance of our agreement relating to the Office Pavilion, Epstein and I agreed that Studio would contract with Fancelli Paneling, Inc., a New York corporation ("Fancelli"), to fabricate, stain, finish, deliver and install the Library Cabinetry for the benefit of Epstein and LSJ. Fancelli holds

as to be properly installed on Little Saint James Island, and the staining and finishing were to be completed. 8. Between May 2009 and March 2010, Fancelli proceeded to install the Library Cabinetry on Little St. James Island. As of the date of this Affidavit, however, Fancelli has failed to frilly com

celli holds itself out as skilled in intricate wood sculpting and specializing in the reproduction of fine antique cabinetry and woodwork. In fact, Fancelli's website advertises that Fancelli's Itjeam of artisans, sculptors and cabinet makers uphold the tradition and carry on the sophisticated art of fin

oro, 556 F.Supp.2d 512, 520 (M.D.N.C. 2008). As a practical matter, Molyneux and Fancelli both have offices in New York City and are incorporated in New York and effecting discovery from Molyneux from a practical standpoint will not be unduly burdensome in New York. New York has adopted a uniform interst

ideration Epstein et at vs. Fancelli Paneling, Inc. Case No. ST-I 0-CV443 "Library Cabinetry"). As third party beneficiaries of that contract with Fancelli, Plaintiffs filed suit against Fancelli for breach of contract and negligence because the Library Cabinetry is defective and its installation was i

against Fancelli for breach of contract and negligence because the Library Cabinetry is defective and its installation was improper and incomplete. Fancelli was served with the Summons and First Amended Complaint on December 3, 2010. On December 30, 2010, Plaintiffs and JP and Molyneux entered into a co