Europgold Ltd. v. Silver N Gold Wholesale, LLC
1:24-cv-07297
| S.D.N.Y. | Jul 9, 2025Background
- Europgold Ltd. filed suit in the Southern District of New York against Silver N Gold Wholesale, LLC, Alpine Gold Group, Inc., and Padam Valiramani (a/k/a Mike Valiramani).
- The action was filed on September 26, 2024; Silver N Gold and Alpine Gold have been served, but all efforts to serve Valiramani have failed.
- A previous motion to serve Valiramani via email was denied due to insufficient evidence that standard service methods were impracticable.
- Subsequent diligent efforts, including multiple attempts at all known addresses and communication attempts through Valiramani’s counsel, also failed.
- Plaintiff renewed its motion for alternative service after Defendants’ counsel ceased cooperating and could not be reached.
- The issue before the court was whether Plaintiff could serve Valiramani by email and certified mail as alternative means.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether conventional service on Valiramani is impracticable | Europgold showed diligent, failed attempts and Valiramani’s evasion | No response from Defendants | Yes; impracticable due to evasion |
| Whether alternative service by email satisfies due process | Email recently used by Valiramani is reasonably calculated to provide notice | No response from Defendants | Yes; service by email permitted |
Key Cases Cited
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Tr. Co., 339 U.S. 306 (1950) (sets standard for due process in service of process)
- Liebeskind v. Liebeskind, 449 N.Y.S.2d 226 (App. Div. 1982), aff’d, 447 N.E.2d 74 (N.Y. 1983) (impracticability of traditional service)