Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
13Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
MOTION for Service by Publication and for Substituted Service on Defendant Jeffrey Rense

MOTION for Service by Publication and for Substituted Service on Defendant Jeffrey Rense

Ratings: (0)|Views: 4,798|Likes:
Published by Lewis Clark
MOTION for Service by Publication and for Substituted Service on Defendant Jeffrey Rense
MOTION for Service by Publication and for Substituted Service on Defendant Jeffrey Rense

More info:

Published by: Lewis Clark on Jul 28, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

01/28/2013

pdf

text

original

 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
)DANIEL PARISI,
et al.
, ))Plaintiffs, )v. ) Civil Action No. 10-0897-RJL)LAWRENCE W. SINCLAIR a/k/a Larry Sinclair,
et al.
, ))Defendants. ))
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUBSTITUTED SERVICE ONDEFENDANT JEFFREY RENSE AND MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT
 Plaintiffs, Daniel Parisi, Whitehouse.com Inc., Whitehouse Network LLC, and WhiteHouse Communications Inc. (collectively referred to as plaintiffs), by counsel, hereby move foran Order for substituted service on defendant Jeffrey Rense (Rense), who has managed to evadethe service of process. In support of this motion, plaintiffs state the following:
BACKGROUND
All of the defendants, except Rense, have been served with the Summons, Complaint,Local Rule 7.1 Certificate and Notice of Right to Consent to Trial Before a U.S. MagistrateJudge (collectively referred to as Process). (Declaration of Richard J. Oparil (Decl.) ¶ 4).Public records confirm that Rense owns, resides and/or works at 4896 Highway 66,Ashland, Oregon 97520. (Decl. ¶ 5 & Exs. 1-9). Plaintiffs made an extraordinary effort to serveProcess on Rense personally, as described in the Affidavit of Sharon Bosch, a private processserver, and Affidavit of Deputy Sheriff Debbie Holbrook (Ex. 11). Their multiple attempts atservice were unsuccessful. (Decl. ¶ 6 & Exs. 10, 11).
Case 1:10-cv-00897-RJL Document 32 Filed 07/28/10 Page 1 of 7
PDF processed with CutePDF evaluation editionwww.CutePDF.com
 
 - 2 -On July 2, 2010, a U.S. Postal Service Express Mail package containing the Process wassent to Rense at 4896 Highway 66, Ashland, Oregon 97520-9712. The package was returned toplaintiffscounsel undelivered. (Decl. ¶ 7 & Ex. 12).A Federal Express package containing the Process was sent that same day to Rense at4896 Highway 66, Ashland, Oregon 97520, standard overnight with a delivery signaturerequired. Federal Express made multiple delivery attempts. The last delivery attempt was madeon July 8, 2010. The package was returned to me by Federal Express with the notation, Refused.(Decl. ¶ 8 & Exs. 13, 14).On July 1, 2010, plaintiffs’ counsel sent an email addressed towebmaster@rense.comandattached thereto a copy of the Process. The same day, Counsel received an electronicallygenerated receipt showing the email was delivered. (Decl. ¶ 9 & Exs. 15, 16). On July 1, 2010,counsel sent another email addressed torenseradio@yahoo.comand attached thereto a copy of the Process, and received an electronically generated receipt showing the email was delivered onJuly 1, 2010. (Decl. ¶ 10 & Exs. 17, 18). On July 1, 2010, plaintiffscounsel sent additionalemails to Rense through his Myspace”pages, attaching thereto copies of the Process. (Decl. ¶ 11& Exs. 19-21).On July 12, 2010, plaintiffs’ counsel sent a letter and copies of the Process addressed toRense at 4896 Highway 66, Ashland, Oregon 97520 by first-class mail, postage prepaid. (Decl. ¶ 12 & Ex. 22).Rense has actual knowledge of this case. On July 27, 2010, Renses website, rense.com,contained a link entitled, Sinclair Moving to DC to Defend Against Parisi Suit(Decl. ¶ 13 & Ex.23 p. 7 of 14). The link leads to the website larrysinclair.com, which contains numerous postingsand documents related to this case. (Decl. ¶ 13 & Ex. 24). Renses site also includes a section
Case 1:10-cv-00897-RJL Document 32 Filed 07/28/10 Page 2 of 7
 
 - 3 -entitled Larry Sinclair, which includes links to larrysinclair.com, which in turn discusses thiscase. (Decl. ¶ 13 & Ex. 23 p. 13 of 14).
ARGUMENT
There is no doubt that Rense is aware of this case and is ducking personal service of thesummons and complaint. Given the emails, mailing, and evidence of actual notice, however,service of process should be deemed to have been properly made on Rense and his time toanswer the summons and complaint should begin to run on the date of this Court’s Order to thateffect.
See, e.g.
,
 McCluskey v. Belford High Sch.
, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62608, *8 (E.D. Mich.June 24, 2010) (service by e-mail is appropriate and consistent with Due Process incircumstances where the party to be served does business on the internet and via e-mail.).In the alternative, the Court should Order the use of methods for substitute service onRense pursuant to the Federal Rules and applicable state law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e)(1) providesthat:Unless federal law provides otherwise, an individual—other than aminor, an incompetent person, or a person whose waiver has beenfiledmay be served in a judicial district of the United States by:(1) following state law for serving a summons in an action broughtin courts of general jurisdiction in the state where the district courtis located or where service is made . . . .D.C. Code § 13-431(a)(2) allows service to be made in the manner prescribed by the law of theplace in which the service is made for service in that place in an action in any of its courts of general jurisdiction . . . .Because Rense is located in Oregon, he can be served by following amethod prescribed by Oregon law. Oregon Rule of Civil Procedure 7D(6) provides that:D(6)(a)
Court order for service by other method.
On motionupon a showing by affidavit or declaration that service cannot bemade by any method otherwise specified in these rules or otherrule or statute, the court, at its discretion, may order service by anymethod or combination of methods which under the circumstances
Case 1:10-cv-00897-RJL Document 32 Filed 07/28/10 Page 3 of 7

Activity (13)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
Brandon Smith liked this
Ren liked this
Ren liked this
funnyhaha71 liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->