Gulf Coast Hotel-Motel Association and its Successor Mississippi Hotel & Lodging Association vs. Mississippi Gulf Coast Golf Course Association et al, No. 1:2008cv01430 - Document 178 (S.D. Miss. 2010)

Court Description: FINAL JUDGMENT : Plaintiff's federal claims for violations of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act and section 2 of the Clayton Act should be and are dismissed with prejudice; Plaintiff's state law claims for tortious interference with business relations and with contract should be and are dismissed without prejudice. Signed by District Judge Halil S. Ozerden on 8/10/2010. (avm)

Download PDF
Gulf Coast Hotel-Motel Association and its Successor Mississip...Coast Golf Course Association et al Doc. 178 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI SOUTHERN DIVISION GULF COAST HOTEL-MOTEL ASSOCIATION AND ITS SUCCESSOR MISSISSIPPI HOTEL & LODGING ASSOCIATION v. MISSISSIPPI GULF COAST GOLF COURSE ASSOCIATION, et al. § § § § § § § § § PLAINTIFF Civil No. 1:08CV1430-HSO-JMR DEFENDANTS FINAL JUDGMENT BEFORE THE COURT is the Motion to Dismiss [113] of Defendants The Pass Christian Isles Golf Club, Inc., Sunkist Country Club, Inc., Mississippi Gulf Coast Golf Course Association, Pacific Life Insurance Company, Diamondhead Country Club and Property Owners Association, Inc., and Great Southern Golf Club, Inc., filed April 1, 2010, in the above-captioned cause, in which Defendants SPE Go Holdings, Inc. [115], Gulf Hills Golf Club, Inc. [116], and Dogwood Hills Golf Course, Inc. [118], have joined. The Court, after a full review and consideration of Defendants’ Motion, the related pleadings on file, and the relevant legal authorities, finds that in accord with its Memorandum Opinion and Order entered herewith, IT IS, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED, that Plaintiff’s federal claims for violations of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 and 2, and violations of section 2 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 13, contained in its Second Amended Complaint should be, and hereby are, DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and that Plaintiff’s state law claims for tortious interference with business relations and Dockets.Justia.com tortious interference with contract should be, and hereby are, DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED, this the 10th day of August, 2010. s/ Halil Suleyman Ozerden HALIL SULEYMAN OZERDEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE -2-

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.