Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 9259548" data-attributes="member: 7023840">I briefly looked at the reply brief (re: the motion to dismiss).Tenkar's counsel very briefly and succinctly dealt with the issue of personal service. I mean ... it's kind of so palm-facingly stupid that it's hard to argue, but it was dealt with well. But this is CivPro 101 - you can't just change a name in a lawsuit. You have to serve a party. This is so basic, I honestly have trouble understanding why LaNasa's counsel even tried to argue the point. It just makes him look ... bad (I would use another word here, but bad suffices).The other interesting thing, which I guess I ignored until now, is that LaNasa's counsel has apparently pled a prima facie tort. I was gobsmacked to see that. It's been a hot minute since I've dealt with New York law, but I still remember hearing a partner berating a summer associate and saying, "It's never a prima facie tort. NEVER!" (For those of you who don't get that ... when you plead it, it's often a signal to the court that you don't have a case. I mean ... it's not that it has never ever occurred, but if you're scraping the bottom of the barrel to plead it, you're probably missing something.)</blockquote>