Cox v. Snap, Inc., No. 1:2016cv00009 - Document 116 (E.D. Va. 2016)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Liam O'Grady on 9/20/2016. (awac)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Cox v. Snap, Inc. Doc. 116 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COD FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGI I Alexandria Division ! i I L'/! SEP2 0 CLERK, U.S. DiSTRlC; COLnTf ALCXANDRiA, VIRGiiNiA CURTIS COX, Civil No. l;16-cv-9 Plaintiff. Hon. Liam O'Grady V. SNAP, INC., Defendant. Memorandum Opinion This matter now comes before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment by Defendant Snap, Inc. ("Snap") and Plaintiff Curtis Cox ("Cox"). Dkt. Nos. 84 & 91. The Motions have been fully briefed and the Court held a hearing on the Motions on September 9, 2016. For the reasons outlined below, the Court finds good cause to GRANT Cox's Motion for Summary Judgment and DENY Snap's Motion for Summary Judgment. I. BACKGROUND In 2006, Snap was a small business looking to grow in the government contracting commimity. At that time. Cox was a well-known figure in the industry. He was also the President ofC^, an established government contractor. Snap proposed a strategic business relationship under which Cox would provide assistance promoting and marketing Snap in exchange for an option representing five percent of Snap's total authorized shares. The terms of the proposed agreement were set out in a Letter 1 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.
