Pinnacle Business Management (Prev SRCI)

[huckleberry]

These attorneys do not seem to know the current attachments (none) of the two in this case (Defendants). However, it did begin in 3/03, I guess that is why they remain involved. Part of the response this past Thursday, 6/17/2004, is pretty funny -


The Complaint states facts regarding the contacts of Pinnacle with Defendant LoCastro that constitute a basis for asserting personal jurisdiction over Defendant Pinnacle, including but not limited to, Pinnacle's duty to train and/or properly supervise LoCastro and/or remedy the actions of LoCastro in this matter. Pinnacle is therefore doing business in PA. and does perform acts within PA. The gist of the Complaint does not consist of Plaintiffs attempting to assert jurisdiction in this matter over Defendant Pinnacle based solely upon an alleged parent-subsidiary relationship theory that is wholly without merit. This Court has jurisdiction over Defendant Pinnacle in this matter for the reasons as stated herein and in the Complaint.