Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

TCF Inventory Finance, Inc. v. Marker Oil Company, Inc., 2:17-cv-1768-JAM-DB. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20180413a60 Visitors: 7
Filed: Apr. 11, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 11, 2018
Summary: ORDER GRANTING TCF INVENTORY FINANCE, INC.'S MOTION FOR CONTEMPT AGAINST DEFENDANTS JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . On September 11, 2017, the Court issued a preliminary injunction against Defendants Marker Oil Company, Inc. ("Marker Oil") and Billy Leon Marker, Jr. (collectively, "Defendants") ordering, adjudging, and decreeing that Marker Oil and its officers, directors, agents, representatives, and employees, as well as any others acting on their behalf, are restrained from doing the f
More

ORDER GRANTING TCF INVENTORY FINANCE, INC.'S MOTION FOR CONTEMPT AGAINST DEFENDANTS

On September 11, 2017, the Court issued a preliminary injunction against Defendants Marker Oil Company, Inc. ("Marker Oil") and Billy Leon Marker, Jr. (collectively, "Defendants") ordering, adjudging, and decreeing that Marker Oil and its officers, directors, agents, representatives, and employees, as well as any others acting on their behalf, are restrained from doing the following:

1. Transferring any interest by sale, pledge, or grant of security interest, or otherwise disposing of, transferring, or encumbering the Subject Property identified in Exhibit 1 to the Preliminary Injunction ("Exhibit 1"); 2. Concealing, hiding, or otherwise removing the Subject Property identified in Exhibit 1; 3. Impairing the value of any of the Subject Property identified in Exhibit 1; 4. Removing the Subject Property identified in Exhibit 1 from the principal place of business of Marker Oil or otherwise outside of the jurisdiction of this Judicial District; and 5. Disposing of the proceeds from the transfer of any interest of the Subject Property identified in Exhibit 1 that may have occurred prior to issuance of this Order.

ECF No. 18. The preliminary injunction further ordered, adjudged, and decreed that Marker Oil and its officers, directors, agents, representatives, and employees, as well as any others acting on their behalf, are required to do the following:

1. Return the Subject Property identified in Exhibit 1 to the principal place of business of Marker Oil at 205 N. Main Street, Alturas, California 96101 or such other location within the Judicial District agreeable to the parties for delivery to Plaintiff TCFIF Inventory Finance, Inc. ("TCFIF"); and 2. Maintain Marker Oil's books and records and provide TCFIF full access to such books and records.

On April 6, 2018, the Court heard TCFIF's motion for contempt against Defendants for violating the preliminary injunction. ECF No. 38. William R. Bay and Jeffrey N. Brown of Thompson Coburn LLP appeared on behalf of TCFIF, Tom Gifford of the Law Office of Tom Gifford appeared by telephone on behalf of Defendants, and Mr. Marker appeared in person.

Following consideration of the parties' written submissions and oral argument, including statements made by Mr. Marker, the Court grants TCFIF's motion for contempt for the reasons stated upon the record and holds Defendants in contempt. The Court finds that Defendants knowingly violated the preliminary injunction as to eight units of the Subject Property by selling the units and/or by removing the units from, or not returning the units to, Marker Oil's principal place of business. The Court further finds that Defendants have not paid TCFIF for the eight sold or otherwise missing units, for which they owe TCFIF $139,653.28.

The Court sanctions Defendants, jointly and severally, and orders them to pay $139,653.28 to TCFIF within 30 days after entry of this order as compensation for the eight units. The Court further orders Defendants, jointly and severally, to pay an additional $15,000.00 to TCFIF within 30 days after entry of this order as reimbursement to TCFIF for its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs incurred in pursuing this order of contempt against Defendants.1 If Defendants do not timely pay these amounts to TCFIF, TCFIF may present further briefing to the Court regarding further appropriate sanctions to be entered against Defendants.

The preliminary injunction issued on September 11, 2017 shall remain in full force and effect. To the extent that TCFIF seeks a new writ of possession pursuant to the Court's order for writ of possession dated September 11, 2017, ECF No. 19, TCFIF shall file an application with the Court to that effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. The Court reviewed and considered the Declaration of William R. Bay concerning attorneys' fees and costs. ECF No. 50. Although the attorneys' rate appears reasonable, the Court found a number of their documented activities to be duplicative and reduced the award accordingly.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer