Dominator Scooter Accessories Inc v. Metal Core Distribution Pty Ltd et al
Plaintiff: Dominator Scooter Accessories Inc
Defendant: Envy Scooters Pty Ltd and Metal Core Distribution Pty Ltd
Case Number: 5:2013cv01129
Filed: June 24, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Michael W. Fitzgerald
Presiding Judge: Oswald Parada
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
August 19, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 71 AMENDED FINAL JUDGMENT 45 by Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald: Upon Request 70 , Defendants Metal Core Distribution Pty., Ltd., Gravity Group Inc., and Phoenix Sports, Inc. (the "Prevailing Parties") shall recover from Dominator Scooter Acces sories, Inc. and Eastward Sports Group, Inc., jointly and severally, the amount of $411,566.71. Post-judgment interest is awarded on the sum of $411,566.71 at the rate of 0.11% per annum, for a daily rate of $1.24 commencing on 11/6/2014 until the judgment is paid. (gk)
December 15, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 45 FINAL JUDGMENT by Judge Michael W. FitzgeraldIT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED as follows: (1) Pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 USC section 1 et seq., the Motions 38 are GRANTED. (2) The 8/12/2014 Final Award issued by the Hon. Terry B. Friedman (Ret.) is confirmed in its entirety. (3) Dominator Scooter Accessories, Inc. (DSA) failed to establish any of its claims against Defendants; (4) DSA and Eastward Sports Group Inc., merged; (5) DSA breached the parties' Agreemen t by assigning it to Eastward; (6) Metal Core was entitled to terminate the parties' Agreement and did so properly; (7) Defendants are the prevailing parties in the underlying arbitration; (8) As the prevailing parties, Defendants are entitled t o judgment in the amount of $402,308.23; (9) The prevailing parties shall further recover from DSA prejudgment interest at a rate of 10% per annum for a daily rate of $110.22 from 8/13/2014 through 11/5/2014. (10) The total amount of the judgment, including prejudgment interest, is $411,566.71; and (11) Post-judgment interest on the sum of $411,566.71, commencing on 11/6/2014, is awarded at the prevailing rate, until the judgment is paid. (jp)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Dominator Scooter Accessories Inc v. Metal Core Distribution Pty Ltd et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Dominator Scooter Accessories Inc
Represented By: Daniel J Herling
Represented By: Howard I Miller
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Envy Scooters Pty Ltd
Represented By: Daniel R Gutenplan
Represented By: Michael E Weinsten
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Metal Core Distribution Pty Ltd
Represented By: Daniel R Gutenplan
Represented By: Michael E Weinsten
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?