Case of the Day: Midmark v. Jamak Healthcare

The case of the day is Midmark Corp. v. Janak Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. (S.D. Ohio 2014). It’s a very poorly done decision, and it badly mangles FRCP 4(f)(3) and various provisions of the Hague Service Convention. The only redeeming feature of the case is its result: the court denied a motion for leave to serve process by email in India. This is the correct decision because of India’s Article 10(a) objection.

I am not going to catalog the decision’s faults. But the judge denied the motion without prejudice. If the plaintiff renews the motion and we get another decision along the same lines, I’ll give a full analysis. Note to readers and law clerks: do not cite this decision or pay attention to its very odd and wrongheaded discussion of the Convention.

About Ted Folkman

Ted Folkman is a shareholder with Murphy & King, a Boston law firm, where he has a complex business litigation practice. He is the author of International Judicial Assistance (MCLE 2d ed. 2016), a nuts-and-bolts guide to international judicial assistance issues, and of the chapter on service of process in the ABA's forthcoming treatise on International Aspects of US Litigation, and he is the publisher of Letters Blogatory, the Web's first blog devoted to international judicial assistance, which the ABA recognized as one of the best 100 legal blogs in 2012, 2014, and 2015.

2 thoughts on “Case of the Day: Midmark v. Jamak Healthcare

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *