Zoroastrian Center and Darb-E-Mehr of Metropolitan Washington, D.C. v. Rustam Guiv Foundation of New York et al, No. 1:2013cv00980 - Document 155 (E.D. Va. 2017)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Liam O'Grady on 1/4/2017. (awac)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Zoroastrian Center and Darb-E-Mehr of Metropolitan Washington, D.C. v. R...ndation of New York et al Doc. 155 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division ZOROASTRIAN CENTER AND DaRB-E-MEHR OF Metropolitan Washington, D.C., Plaintiff, Civil Action No. l-13-cv-980 -V- Rustam Guiv Foundation, et al.. Defendants. Memorandum Opinion This matter comes before the Court on remand from the Fourth Circuit Court ofAppeals, Dkt. No. 140. The Fourth Circuit remanded the case only with respect to the calculation of attorneys' fees. For the reasons discussed below, the Court ORDERS Defendants to submit an appropriate downward adjustment ofattorneys' fees, and supporting evidence as appropriate, within twenty-one (21) days ofthe issuance ofthis Order. Plaintiffshall have fourteen (14) days to respond to Defendants' filing if it so chooses. I. Background^ This dispute arose out ofafailed effort to construct aZoroastrian worship center in Fairfax, Virginia. Plaintiff, Zoroastrian Center and Darb-E-Mehr ofMetroplitan Washington D.C. entered into aninety-nine year lease with Defendants Rustam Guiv Foundation ofNew York, the land owner, and other trustee defendants. Following difficulties in the relationship, Defendants terminated the lease. Article XIII ofthe parties' lease states that "[i]n the event of any litigation between the parties hereto, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to ' TOs Background section focuses on ftcts relevant to the present Motion. Amore fulsome recitation ofthe extensive fectual record can be found in the Court's May 12,2014 Memorandum Opinion. See Dkt. No. 80. Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
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.
