Antech Diagnostics, Inc. v. Gilbertson et al
Antech Diagnostics, Inc. |
Catherine Gilbertson, DVM, Danielle Cook, DVM, John Doe Cook, John Doe Gilbertson and The Cat Clinic, LLC |
Danielle Cook, DVM and John Doe Cook |
John Doe Gilbertson, Catherine Gilbertson, DVM and The Cat Clinic, LLC |
2:2014cv01735 |
November 10, 2014 |
US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
Seattle Office |
Whatcom |
Marsha J. Pechman |
Other Contract |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 52 ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT by Judge Marsha J. Pechman re 23 28 30 . The Court finds that 28 U.S.C. § 1332's amount in controversy requirement is met, and therefore DENIES Defendants' motions to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Court finds that Defendants Gilbertson and Cook signed the Agreement with Plaintiff in their individual capacities, and therefore GRANTS Plaintiff's motion and DENIES Defendants' motions on this issue . The Court concludes that Defendants are not entitled to loan forgiveness under the terms of the Agreement because they failed to timely pay Antech's invoices, and therefore GRANTS Plaintiff's motion as to loan forgiveness. Finally, the Court GRANTS Defendants' motions as to Plaintiff's damages with some modification. The Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to $16,000, plus interest at 6% per year, as well as $40,467.56, plus pre-judgment interest, in total damages. (PM) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Washington Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.