Davies v. Jobs & Adverts Online, GmbH

94 F. Supp. 2d 719 (2000)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Davies v. Jobs & Adverts Online, GmbH

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
94 F. Supp. 2d 719 (2000)

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…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership