Bhagat v. Shah
This text of Bhagat v. Shah (Bhagat v. Shah) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
VIRAL BHAGAT, 24cv01424 (VEC) (RFT) Plaintiff, -against- ORDER
ANUJA SHARAD SHAH, Defendant.
ROBYN F. TARNOFSKY, United States Magistrate Judge: Defendant has made an adequate showing that alternative service under CPLR § 308(5) is justified because service through the other methods in CPLR § 308 are impracticable. Defendant has further made an adequate showing that service on Attorney Andrew Miltenberg is likely to reach Rushad Dordi. Accordingly, Defendant may effect service on Dordi by sending a copy of the subpoena to Attorney Miltenberg (along with a copy of this order) with instructions that Attorney Miltenberg is to send this order and the subpoena to Dordi. See Sirius XM Radio Inc. v. Aura Multimedia Corp., 339 F.R.D. 592 (Dec. 4, 2021). The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to terminate ECF 75.
DATED: January 8, 2025 SO ORDERED.
ROBYN F. TARNOFSKY United States Magistrate Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bhagat v. Shah, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bhagat-v-shah-nysd-2025.