High Elevations, LLC v. Garber et al
| High Elevations, LLC |
| Scott Garber, Jacob Sadoff and Jordan Sadoff |
| 1:2016cv01041 |
| January 25, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Chicago Office |
| Cook |
| Virginia M. Kendall |
| Other Contract |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
87
MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order signed by the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 3/30/2018. The Agreement drafted by the Defendants required payment to the Plaintiffs in total of $175,000 in exchange for nullification of the November 2014 Non-Disclos ure and Non-Compete Agreement and the ability to proceed with a Sky Zone Franchise. The term "proceed" in the Agreement required the Defendants to open a Sky Zone franchise. This did not occur. Because the event entitling the Plaintiffs to a one-time full royalty payment of $175,000 did not occur, theHEL parties are not entitled to the full payment. However, because the events set forth in Paragraph 4's subsections are each express conditions, and there is no dispute that the express condition in 4(i) was met, the HEL parties are entitled to retain the $43,750 payment made by Defendants pursuant to this provision. Defendants do not owe any future payments to Plaintiffs. Judgment to follow. Mailed notice(lk, )
|
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 Illinois Northern 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.
