Day v. Cornér Bank (Overseas) Ltd.
789 F. Supp. 2d 136
D.D.C.2011Background
- Tonya Day filed Aug. 2010 in D.D.C. against Cornèr Bank Overseas Limited (CBL), Cornèr Banca S.A. (CB) and Bahamian firm GTC and its Bahamian employee Mr. Roberts over an alleged offshore account of >$14 million.
- Plaintiff claims her mother Lavera Foelgner spoke of a Bahamas-based CORNER BANK account with a back-stickered painting as purported account number/password.
- Mother died in a road incident before records could be shared; plaintiff pursued leads and linked the account to CBL/CB.
- GTC allegedly represented CBL; GTC withdrew; plaintiff then traveled to the Bahamas seeking access to bank records and encountered Roberts.
- Plaintiff asserts multiple claims (breach of contract/fiduciary duty, conversion, unjust enrichment, civil conspiracy, battery, IIED, malpractice/fraud) and seeks equity relief; defendants raise service, dismissal, and sanctions motions; the court strikes a Notice of Correction, finds service adequate, denies sanctions without prejudice, and dismissals without prejudice pending an amended complaint.
- The court adopts an expedited briefing schedule for remaining issues following amendment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Notice of Correction was a valid amendment | Day seeks to add/correct allegations, not merely fix typos | Defendants argue Rule 15 requires an amended pleading or consent | Struck; cannot have substantive effect as an amendment |
| Whether service on Bahamian defendants complied with the Hague Convention | Initial service under Article 10(c) was proper; subsequent service via Central Authority justified | Defendants challenged service as defective or misdirected | All four defendants properly served as of Jan. 20, 2011 |
| Whether Rule 11 sanctions are warranted against plaintiff or counsel | Sanctions are improper or overbroad given diligence to amend | Allegations inconsistent; sanctions appropriate | Denied without prejudice for GTC; denied without prejudice for CBL/Roberts; subject to renewal if inconsistencies persist |
| Whether to proceed on the merits or dismissals pending amendment | Amendment will clarify bases and permit full briefing | Motions to dismiss should be resolved | Denied without prejudice pending amended complaint; future filings may refile grounds for dismissal |
| What briefing schedule and procedural posture should govern going forward | Expedited briefing appropriate given urgency | Continued need for orderly briefing | Expedited briefing to resolve remaining issues after amendment |
Key Cases Cited
- Footbridge Ltd. Trust v. Zhang, 584 F. Supp. 2d 150 (D.D.C. 2008) (errata or corrections not to amend pleadings; proper use of Rule 15/errata)
- Unique Indus. v. 965207 Alta. Ltd., 722 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2009) (court discretion on motions to strike under Rule 12(f))
- State of Israel v. Doe, 400 F. Supp. 2d 86 (D.D.C. 2005) (Article 10 Hague service; central authority mechanisms)
- Melara v. China N. Indus. Corp., 658 F. Supp. 2d 178 (D.D.C. 2009) (flexible due diligence for foreign service timing)
- Bender v. Jordan, 679 F. Supp. 2d 85 (D.D.C. 2010) (reasonable inquiry standard for Rule 11 sanctions)
- Green v. AFL-CIO, 657 F. Supp. 2d 161 (D.D.C. 2009) (applies objective standard for reasonableness in sanctions)