Opinion
C.A. No: K13L-06-058 RBY
04-09-2014
PHILIP ARCORIA, Plaintiff, v. RCC ASSOCIATES, INC., 3745 HOLDINGS, LLC, DOES 1 THROUGH 20 INCLUSIVE, Defendants.
Philip Arcoria, Pro se. Daniel F. Wolcott, Jr., Esquire, Potter Anderson & Carroon, LLP, Wilmington, Delaware for Defendant RCC Associates, Inc. Richard L. Abbott, Esquire, Abbott Law Firm, Hockessin, Delaware for Defendant 3745 Holdings, LLC.
Upon Consideration of
Defendant 3745 Holdings, LLC's Motion for Partial Reargument
DENIED
Upon Consideration of
Defendant RCC Associates, Inc.'s Motion for Reconsideration
GRANTED
ORDER
Philip Arcoria, Pro se. Daniel F. Wolcott, Jr., Esquire, Potter Anderson & Carroon, LLP, Wilmington, Delaware for Defendant RCC Associates, Inc. Richard L. Abbott, Esquire, Abbott Law Firm, Hockessin, Delaware for Defendant 3745 Holdings, LLC. Young, J.
In its Motion for Reargument, Defendant 3745 Holdings, LLC asserts that the issue of Plaintiff's failure to comply with 25 Del. Code § 2722 was not addressed by the Court. As Plaintiff noted in his response to the original Motion, paragraph 7 of his Complaint alleges that the labor in question was provided by virtue of written contracts with Defendant RCC. That allegation is sufficient to satisfy the pleading requirements, at least at this early stage of procedures, of 25 Del. Code § 2722 as described in King Constr., Inc. v. Plaza Four Realty, LLC ,976 A.2d 145 (Del. 2009). Accordingly, Defendant 3745 Holdings' Motion is DENIED.
In its Motion for Reconsideration, Defendant RCC Associates, Inc., has stressed that the venue issue relative to this matter is subject to the specific contract terminology relevant herein determining that Florida is the "sale and exclusive venue and jurisdiction for all suits," now referencing RWI Acquisition, LLC v. Todd, 2012 WL 1955279 (Del. Ch.). Plaintiff has not responded to Defendant RCC's Motion. Following the reasoning set forth therein, the Court finds the Motion of Defendant RCC to be well taken.
Accordingly, on the basis of improper forum, this Court is precluded from entertaining Plaintiff's Counts II through V. Thus, on that basis and for those purposes, Defendant RCC's Motion is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Robert B. Young
J.
RBY/lmc
oc: Prothonotary
cc: Counsel
Mr. Arcoria, Pro se
Opinion Distribution
File