7-ELEVEN, INC. v. MUSA, 1:14-cv-12744-IT. (2014)
Court: District Court, D. Massachusetts
Number: infdco20140926c35
Visitors: 13
Filed: Sep. 25, 2014
Latest Update: Sep. 25, 2014
Summary: ORDER INDIRA TALWANI, District Judge. This case concerns a franchise agreement governing the relationship between Plaintiff 7-Eleven, Inc. and Defendant Musa. Before the court are Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction [#7] and Defendant's Cross-Motion for Preliminary Injunction [#22]. As counsel acknowledged at oral argument, whether either party can demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits for the claims presented in their respective motions for preliminary in
Summary: ORDER INDIRA TALWANI, District Judge. This case concerns a franchise agreement governing the relationship between Plaintiff 7-Eleven, Inc. and Defendant Musa. Before the court are Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction [#7] and Defendant's Cross-Motion for Preliminary Injunction [#22]. As counsel acknowledged at oral argument, whether either party can demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits for the claims presented in their respective motions for preliminary inj..
More
ORDER
INDIRA TALWANI, District Judge.
This case concerns a franchise agreement governing the relationship between Plaintiff 7-Eleven, Inc. and Defendant Musa. Before the court are Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction [#7] and Defendant's Cross-Motion for Preliminary Injunction [#22]. As counsel acknowledged at oral argument, whether either party can demonstrate a substantial likelihood of success on the merits for the claims presented in their respective motions for preliminary injunction depends on whether Plaintiff properly terminated the franchise agreement. Because the court finds that the existence of disputed facts prevent either party, at this stage, from demonstrating a substantial likelihood of success on the merits on this issue, the court hereby DENIES both motions.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
