Digital Media Law Project
Published on Digital Media Law Project (https://www.dmlp.org)

Home > Medinah Mining v. Ingram

Medinah Mining v. Ingram [1]

Submitted by DMLP Staff on Mon, 11/10/2008 - 11:24

Summary

Threat Type: 

Lawsuit

Date: 

02/22/2000

Status: 

Concluded

Disposition: 

Dismissed (total)

Location: 

Nevada

Verdict or Settlement Amount: 

N/A

Legal Claims: 

Conversion
Defamation
Fraud
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
Negligence
Tortious Interference
Unfair Competition
Medinah Mining Company ("Medinah"), a Nevada corporation, and Les Price, a Canadian citizen and officer and director of Medinah, sued sixteen individual defendants from Chile, Canada, and several U.S. states, alleging that they defamed Medinah and Price over the Internet, including... read full description
Parties

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Christian Amunategui; Frank W. Cerney; Bruce Neuman; John Melnyk; Jerry Segal; D. Sheridan; Frank Paletta; Shelly Paletta; Peter Smith; James Ingram; Ty Smith; David Peak; J.B. Steele; Frank Calegory; Rahminder Singh; Michael Elson (aka Michael Craig

Type of Party: 

Individual
Organization

Type of Party: 

Individual

Location of Party: 

  • Nevada
  • Canada

Location of Party: 

  • California
  • Florida
  • Ohio
  • Massachusetts
  • Washington
  • Alabama
  • Arkansas
  • Utah
  • Canada
  • Chile

Legal Counsel: 

Joe E. Colvin; Michael J Morrison

Legal Counsel: 

Frank W. Cerney (Pro Se); Wayne A Shaffer (for Defendants Craig, Melnyk, and Howe); N. Patrick Flanagan, III (for Defendant Ingram); Devon T. Reese (for Defendant Neuman); Jerry Segal (Pro Se)
Description

Medinah Mining Company ("Medinah"), a Nevada corporation, and Les Price, a Canadian citizen and officer and director of Medinah, sued sixteen individual defendants from Chile, Canada, and several U.S. states, alleging that they defamed Medinah and Price over the Internet, including on the Raging Bull [2] forum. The complaint failed to identify the specific allegedly defamatory statements, saying only that the defendants' comments related to the integrity and business ethics of Medinah and Price.  Besides defamation, the complaint included ten related claims, including for tortious interference, outrage, and fraud.  

Several defendants moved to dismiss on various grounds, including failure to serve process and lack of personal jurisdiction.  The court dismissed one defendant, James Ingram, for lack of personal jurisdiction.  Ingram was a resident of Arkansas, who had never been to Nevada or done business there. The court held that Ingram's postings on the Internet were insufficient to confer personal jurisdiction over him to a Nevada court.  The court ultimately dismissed the entire case for failure to prosecute. 

Details

Web Site(s) Involved: 

Raging Bull [2]

Content Type: 

  • Text

Publication Medium: 

Forum

Subject Area: 

  • Defamation
  • Personal Jurisdiction
  • User Comments or Submissions
Court Information & Documents

Jurisdiction: 

  • Nevada

Source of Law: 

  • Nevada

Court Name: 

United States District Court for the District of Nevada

Court Type: 

Federal

Case Number: 

CV-N-00-0163-ECR-VPC

Relevant Documents: 

PDF icon 2001-10-15-Third Amended Complaint.pdf [3]
PDF icon 2002-03-15-Ingram's Motion to Dismiss.pdf [4]
PDF icon 2001-04-27-Medinah's 2nd Amended Complaint.pdf [5]
PDF icon 2001-07-19-Howe's Motion to Dismiss 2nd Amended Complaint.pdf [6]
PDF icon 2001-09-04-Medinah's Opposition to Howe's Motion to Dismiss.pdf [7]
PDF icon 2003-03-27-Order Dismissing Steele, Neuman, and Cerney.pdf [8]
PDF icon 2003-05-07-Order Dismissing Amunategui.pdf [9]
PDF icon 2003-06-24-Order Dismissing Paletta, Paletta, and Elson (Craig).pdf [10]
PDF icon 2003-09-03-Order Dismissing Entire Case for Want of Prosecution.pdf [11]
PDF icon 2003-09-17-Judgment of Court Dismissing Medinah Mining vs Amunategui.pdf [12]
PDF icon 2002-11-5-Order on Ingram's Motion to Dismiss.pdf [13]
CMLP Information (Private)

Priority: 

1-High

DMLP Logo


Source URL (modified on 08/20/2014 - 11:05pm): https://www.dmlp.org/threats/medinah-mining-v-ingram

Links
[1] https://www.dmlp.org/threats/medinah-mining-v-ingram
[2] http://ragingbull.quote.com/cgi-bin/static.cgi/a=index.txt&d=mainpages
[3] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2001-10-15-Third%20Amended%20Complaint.pdf
[4] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2002-03-15-Ingram%27s%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf
[5] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2001-04-27-Medinah%27s%202nd%20Amended%20Complaint.pdf
[6] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2001-07-19-Howe%27s%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss%202nd%20Amended%20Complaint.pdf
[7] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2001-09-04-Medinah%27s%20Opposition%20to%20Howe%27s%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf
[8] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2003-03-27-Order%20Dismissing%20Steele%2C%20Neuman%2C%20and%20Cerney.pdf
[9] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2003-05-07-Order%20Dismissing%20Amunategui.pdf
[10] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2003-06-24-Order%20Dismissing%20Paletta%2C%20Paletta%2C%20and%20Elson%20%28Craig%29.pdf
[11] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2003-09-03-Order%20Dismissing%20Entire%20Case%20for%20Want%20of%20Prosecution.pdf
[12] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2003-09-17-Judgment%20of%20Court%20Dismissing%20Medinah%20Mining%20vs%20Amunategui.pdf
[13] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2002-11-5-Order%20on%20Ingram%27s%20Motion%20to%20Dismiss.pdf