Davies v. Jobs & Adverts Online, GmbH
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
94 F. Supp. 2d 719 (2000)
- Written by Catherine Cotovsky, JD
Facts
Davies (plaintiff) sued German corporation Jobs and Adverts Online, GmbH (JAO) (defendant) for breach of contract. JAO hired Davies to be the president of JAO’s subsidiary, Jobs and Adverts USA, Inc. (JAUSA). JAUSA was wholly owned by JAO but operated as a separate entity. Davies’s employment contract stated that either party could terminate the contract without cause with three months’ notice or JAO could terminate the contract with no notice for cause. Several months after hiring Davies, JAO notified Davies that her employment was being terminated without cause. However, a subsequent audit of JAUSA’s books revealed that Davies had committed multiple acts of financial misconduct as JAUSA’s president. JAO promptly reclassified Davies’s termination as for cause and refused to pay the severance Davies would have received had her termination remained without cause. Davies filed suit and attempted to serve process on JAO per the Virginia statute for substituted service on a foreign corporation by serving the Clerk of the State Corporation Commission (clerk) in Richmond, Virginia, who mailed a copy of the complaint to JAO’s office in Germany. JAO moved to dismiss the complaint for improper service because Davies failed to comply with the provisions of the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters (Hague Convention). Davies conceded that the service failed to comply with the Hague Convention because Germany had expressly objected to service of process by mail, but rather than dismiss the lawsuit, the trial court allowed Davies 60 days to properly serve process on JAO. Davies then served JAO’s U.S.-based attorney, Kelm, who was also the registered agent for JAUSA. JAO again moved to dismiss for insufficient service of process. Davies argued that service was sufficient because, as JAO’s attorney, Kelm was JAO’s agent, and also, service upon JAUSA’s registered agent constituted proper service on its parent company, JAO.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Ellis, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.