MTR Capital, LLC v. Lavida Massage Franchise Development, Inc. et al, No. 2:2017cv13552 - Document 101 (E.D. Mich. 2021)
Court Description: OPINION and ORDER DENYING 90 , 93 Motions for Reconsideration, and DENYING 89 MOTION for Attorney Fees. Signed by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (AChu)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Dockets.Justia.com MTR CAPITAL, LLC, ORDER DENYING MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DENYING MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES LAVIDA MASSAGE FRANCHISE DEVELOPMENT, INC., ET AL., MTR Capital, LLC v. Lavida Massage Franchise Development, Inc. et al DENIED. DENIED. Doc. 101 I. BACKGROUND Id. Id. II. STANDARD OF REVIEW Henderson v. Walled Lake Consol. Sch. Intera Corp. v. Henderson Id Howard v. United States Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Engler Leisure Caviar, LLC v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv. Gonzalez v. Crosby McAlpin v. Lexington 76 Auto Truck Stop, Inc. Jinks v. Alliedsignal Miles v. Straub Johnson v. Unknown Dellatifa III. ANALYSIS A. Plaintiff’s Motion See, e.g., id. id. id. Id. B. Defendants’ Motion i. Basis for a damages award Rollins, Inc. Rollins, Inc. v. Heller Rollins Id. Id. because Id. ii. Basis for an FDUTPA claim Cluck-U Chicken See, e.g., Cluck-U Chicken, Inc. v. Cluck-U Corp. Cluck-U Chicken Cluck-U Chicken Id. Cluck-U can Cluck-U did iii. Liability of the individual Defendants KC Leisure, Inc. v. Haber Id. should have had KC Leisure should have C. Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney Fees see also Moritz v. Hoyt Enterprises, Inc. Humane Soc. of Broward Cty., Inc. v. Fla. Humane Soc. Humane Society CONCLUSION DENIED DENIED DENIED SO ORDERED
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
