CARRIGAN v. ARTHUR J. GALLAGHER RISK MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., 3:10-cv-1089. (2012)
Court: District Court, M.D. Tennessee
Number: infdco20120601j73
Visitors: 18
Filed: May 30, 2012
Latest Update: May 30, 2012
Summary: ORDER ALETA A. TRAUGER, District Judge. For the reasons expressed in the accompanying Memorandum, summary judgment is GRANTED in the plaintiff's favor on his claim for breach of contract and AJGRMS' Motion for Default (Docket No. 55) is DENIED. The only liability issue remaining is AJGRMS' counterclaim for abuse of process, which the court may rule on as a matter of law at the pretrial conference. The court has already found that the plaintiff is liable to AJGRMS on its breach of contract
Summary: ORDER ALETA A. TRAUGER, District Judge. For the reasons expressed in the accompanying Memorandum, summary judgment is GRANTED in the plaintiff's favor on his claim for breach of contract and AJGRMS' Motion for Default (Docket No. 55) is DENIED. The only liability issue remaining is AJGRMS' counterclaim for abuse of process, which the court may rule on as a matter of law at the pretrial conference. The court has already found that the plaintiff is liable to AJGRMS on its breach of contract ..
More
ORDER
ALETA A. TRAUGER, District Judge.
For the reasons expressed in the accompanying Memorandum, summary judgment is GRANTED in the plaintiff's favor on his claim for breach of contract and AJGRMS' Motion for Default (Docket No. 55) is DENIED. The only liability issue remaining is AJGRMS' counterclaim for abuse of process, which the court may rule on as a matter of law at the pretrial conference. The court has already found that the plaintiff is liable to AJGRMS on its breach of contract counterclaim in the amount of $47,611.69. Thus, the only damages issue remaining is the amount of damages the plaintiff is entitled to recover as a result of AJGRMS' breach of the non-compete clause contained in the Sale Agreement.
It is so ordered.
Source: Leagle
