5
Shared Docs
5
Same-Page
5 / 9
Mentions
c instructions for service of process on corporations. The affidavit of service of Plaintiff's process server states that he delivered a copy of the Summons and First Amended complaint to "Christian Barthod, co-worker, a person of suitable age and discretion." As noted in the Affidavit of Mr. Christian
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
server then purported to serve Defendant at its offices, 24 East 64th Street, New York, NY on November 29, 2010, by "delivering a true copy of [the Summons and First Amended Complaint] on Christian Barthod, CO-WORKER a person of suitable age and discretion." (emphasis supplied). FAC, Exhibit 1. Plaint
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
the agreement made between Molyneux and Fancelli. The Complaint was replaced by a First Amended Complaint on August 3, 2010. Plaintiffs served the Summons and First Amended Complaint on Christian Berthed, an employee of Fancelli Paneling, at the Fancelli Paneling offices in New York. It sent copies by
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
f 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 confidential settlement agree
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
erson described in the affidavit of attempted service submitted by "Frederick Pringle." Mr. Pringle states that he attempted to serve a copy of the Summons and First Amended Complaint at the offices of Fancelli Paneling, Inc., 24 East 64th Street, New York, NY on August 5 and August 10, 2010, and each t
al project - a library - in mind. He seemed vague as to details, so I asked him to send plans. He said he did not have any, but wanted to visit the Fancelli showroom. I set an appointment with him for November 29, 2010 at 5:3015. 4. On November 29, 2010, Charles Oregano called again to make sure that I
Entities connected to both Russell Simmons and Fancelli

Jeffrey Epstein
PERSONDarren Indyke
PERSON
Prince Andrew
PERSON
Prince Charles
PERSON
Lesley Groff
PERSON
Marc Rich
PERSON
George W. Bush
PERSON
Alan Dershowitz
PERSONLeon Black
PERSON
Woody Allen
PERSON
Michael Jackson
PERSON
New York
LOCATION
Scarlett Johansson
PERSONMaria Farmer
PERSON
George Mitchell
PERSON
Harry Reid
PERSON
John F. Kennedy
PERSON
Condoleezza Rice
PERSON
Vicky Ward
PERSON
Abraham Lincoln
PERSON