Great American Insurance Company v. Gemstone Property Management
Great American Insurance Company v. Gemstone Property Management, LLC et al.; Gemstone Property Management, LLC et al. v. Aspen Speciality Insurance Company, et al.
- Lewis Liman
- 1:23-cv-09100
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Great American v. Gemstone, Judge Liman allowed alternative service of subpoenas after repeated failed personal-service attempts.
Great American Insurance Company, nonparties Tanvir Chaudhry and Elsie Real Cibbarelli, and Chaudhry’s companies, Sahiwal Associates, Inc. and Tri-State Medical Liaison Services, Inc.
What happened
In Great American Insurance Company v. Gemstone Property Management, LLC et al., Great American sought subpoenas from nonparty Tanvir Chaudhry, his companies, and nonparty Elsie Real Cibbarelli in connection with its allegation that a settlement was fraudulent.
Great American said process servers repeatedly tried to personally deliver the subpoenas at Chaudhry’s and Cibbarelli’s homes. The court found that personal service was impracticable and that the proposed alternative methods were reasonably likely to give the recipients notice.
Judge Lewis J. Liman granted the motions for alternative service. The court authorized door delivery and certified-mail service for Cibbarelli, and door delivery, certified mail, and email or mail to Chaudhry’s attorney for Chaudhry; proof of service must be filed under the federal subpoena rule.
The detailed version
- Great American Insurance Company v. Gemstone Property Management · No. 1:23-cv-09100
- Lewis Liman
- Dec. 3, 2025
Background
Great American Insurance Company alleged that a settlement involving Luis Manuel Garcia Salcedo and Subin Associates, LLP, after a lawsuit against Gemstone Property Management, LLC and DHNY IV LLC, resulted from fraud. Great American sought information about alleged relationships among Salcedo, Subin, Tanvir Chaudhry, Chaudhry’s companies, and Elsie Real Cibbarelli, including a $15,000 payment to Tri-State Medical Liaison Services, Inc. from one litigation-funding agreement.
Motions
Great American moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 45 for permission to use alternative service—methods other than personally delivering a subpoena to the named recipient. It sought to depose Chaudhry and Cibbarelli, and to obtain documents from Sahiwal Associates, Inc. and Tri-State Medical Liaison Services, Inc.
A process server attempted to serve Chaudhry personally five times at his Metuchen, New Jersey, home. On one occasion, his wife confirmed that he lived there and accepted the subpoenas. Chaudhry’s attorney, Aaron Pierce, helped with scheduling but said he was not authorized to accept service. A process server attempted to serve Cibbarelli personally six times at her home. During the first attempt, her husband confirmed that she lived there and accepted a copy of the subpoena.
Court’s Analysis
Rule 45 generally requires delivery of a subpoena to the named person. The court explained that alternative service may be authorized after a diligent effort to provide personal service, and that the alternative method must be reasonably calculated to ensure that the recipient actually receives the subpoena.
The court found that the five attempts to serve Chaudhry and the six attempts to serve Cibbarelli established that personal service was impracticable. It also found the proposed methods reasonably calculated to provide notice because the attempts occurred at addresses where spouses had confirmed that the recipients lived. For Chaudhry, the proposed service also included sending copies to his attorney by certified mail and email.
Ruling
Judge Lewis J. Liman granted the motions for alternative service as described in the order. Proper service on Chaudhry consists of affixing the subpoenas and accompanying documents to his Metuchen address, mailing them by certified mail to that address, mailing the subpoenas by certified mail to Aaron Pierce, and emailing copies of the subpoenas to Pierce. Proper service on Cibbarelli consists of affixing the subpoenas to her Staten Island address and mailing them by certified mail to that address.
The court directed that proof of service be filed under Rule 45(b)(4) and directed the Clerk of Court to close Docket Numbers 203 and 207.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.