DUNKIN' DONUTS FRANCHISING, LLC v. CLAUDIA I, LLC, 12-2010. (2014)
Court: District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Number: infdco20141229391
Visitors: 5
Filed: Dec. 12, 2014
Latest Update: Dec. 12, 2014
Summary: ORDER GERALD AUSTIN McHUGH, Judge. This 12th day of December, 2014 it is ORDERED as follows: 1. For the reasons explained in the Court's Memorandum of October 20, 2014: a. As to Plaintiffs' Count I, alleging breach of franchise agreement and sublease, judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants. b. As to Plaintiffs' Counts II and III, alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition, judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants. c. As to P
Summary: ORDER GERALD AUSTIN McHUGH, Judge. This 12th day of December, 2014 it is ORDERED as follows: 1. For the reasons explained in the Court's Memorandum of October 20, 2014: a. As to Plaintiffs' Count I, alleging breach of franchise agreement and sublease, judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants. b. As to Plaintiffs' Counts II and III, alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition, judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants. c. As to Pl..
More
ORDER
GERALD AUSTIN McHUGH, Judge.
This 12th day of December, 2014 it is ORDERED as follows:
1. For the reasons explained in the Court's Memorandum of October 20, 2014:
a. As to Plaintiffs' Count I, alleging breach of franchise agreement and sublease, judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants.
b. As to Plaintiffs' Counts II and III, alleging trademark infringement and unfair competition, judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants.
c. As to Plaintiffs' Count IV, seeking enforcement of the restrictive covenant, judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants.
d. The injunction issued by Judge Stengel on May 17, 2013 is permanent.
e. As to Defendants' Count III, breach of contract against Spring Hill and Dunkin', judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiffs and Spring Hill and against Defendants.
f. As to Defendants' Count V, breach of franchise agreement against Plaintiffs, judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants.
g. As to Defendants' Count VII, tortious interference with the Franchise Agreement against Spring Hill, judgment is entered in favor of Spring Hill and against Defendants.
h. As stated in the Memorandum, the total judgment, not including reasonable attorneys' fees, awarded against Defendants to Dunkin' was $212,724.57.
2. For the reasons explained in the Court's Memorandum accompanying this Order relating to reasonable attorneys' fees:
a. Plaintiffs are awarded attorneys' fees and costs against Defendants in the amount of $203,803.34.
b. Spring Hill's request for an award of attorneys' fees against Plaintiffs or Defendants is DENIED.
3. Judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants Claudia I, LLC, Manfred P. Marotta, and Lynne K. Marotta in the amount of $212,724.57 (judgment on the merits) plus $203,803.34 (attorneys' fees and costs), for a total of $416,527.91.
4. The Clerk of Court shall close this case for statistical purposes.
Source: Leagle
