Innovatus Capital Partners, LLC v. Neuman et al, No. 1:2018cv04252 - Document 130 (S.D.N.Y. 2020)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER re: (98 in 1:18-cv-04252-LLS) MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Amanda Zachman, Greg Williams, Antony Mitchell, Jonathan Neuman, Daryl Clark, Ritz Advisors, LLC. Innovatus's claim for an inj unction enforcing the restrictive covenant in the NOA is dismissed. Its entitlement to recompense for its contributions, to the extent that they have benefitted the enterprise, is still to be evaluated. So ordered. (Signed by Judge Louis L. Stanton on 12/23/2020) (rro)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Innovatus Capital Partners, LLC v. Neuman et al Doc. 130 Case 1:18-cv-04252-LLS Document 130 Filed 12/23/20 Page 1 of 2 SDN\' ยท. USDC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK I DOCU'.\-IENT .I ELECTRONICALL. Y FILED :' DQC #:_______ DATE FILED: 12/23/2020 -.------- X INNOVATUS CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC, Plaintiff, 18 Civ. 4252 (LLS) - against JONATHAN NEUMAN, ANTONY MITCHELL, RITZ ADVISORS, LLC, GREG WILLIAMS, DARYL CLARK and AMANDA ZACHMAN, Defendants. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X MV REALTY, PBC, LLC, 18 Civ. 7142 (LLS) Plaintiff, - against - MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER INNOVATUS CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC, Defendant. - - - - - - - X The issues raised by defendants' October 9, 2020 Motion for Summary Judgment are disposed of as follows: 1. Innovatus's attempt to enjoin defendants' soliciting of Right to List contracts (an arrangement which Innovatus did not invent, was not the first to market, and could not patent, because of prior art) for six years must be dismissed. It seeks to forbid "any transaction or series of transactions of any kind in connection with the Business Opportunity" although the RTL contracts do not reveal any of Innovatus's confidential information. This type of boundless restriction on competition is unenforceable under New York law. It is not needed to protect Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:18-cv-04252-LLS Document 130 Filed 12/23/20 Page 2 of 2 any trade secrets Innovatus may have , for the conduct of the RTL transaction does not reveal them . The balance of " competing public policies in favor of robust competition and freedom to contract", Mathias v. 2001) Jacobs , 167 F . Supp . 2d 606 , 611 (S . D. N.Y. strongly argues against this overbroad restraint upon competition . 2. Nevertheless , if Innovatus ' s considerable work , effort , research and thought during the period the parties were working together enhanced the results of MV ' s RTL business, evaluated and , it should be if useful , compensated . That may require a comparison of MV ' s methods and profitability with those transacting the other "thousands of RTL transactions with homeowners around the country" (Def. ' s moving brief , p.14), but in any event will require some discovery and is reserved for trial or further development . CONCLUSION Innovatus ' s claim for an injunction enforcing the restrictive covenant in the NOA is dismissed . Its entitlement to recompense for its contributions , to the extent that they have benefitted the enterprise , is still to be evaluated . So ordered . Dated: New York , New York December 23, 2020 LOUIS L . STANTON U.S.D . J . - 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.
