SUPER 8 MOTELS, INC. v. RAHMATULLAH

SUPER 8 MOTELS, INC. v. RAHMATULLAH

Plaintiff:	SUPER 8 MOTELS, INC.
Defendant:	ABU M. RAHMATULLAH
Case Number:	1:2007cv01358
Filed:	October 22, 2007
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office:	Indianapolis Office
County:	XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge:	David Frank Hamilton
Presiding Judge:	William T. Lawrence
Nature of Suit:	Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
September 9, 2009	Filing 68 ENTRY ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Super 8 moved for summary judgment on Counts I (Lanham Act claims), III (liquidated damages for early termination of the Franchise Agreement), IV (Recurring Fees owed under the Franchise Agreement), and V I (Rahmatullah's guaranty of Franchise Agreement) and on each of Rahmatullah's counterclaims. Rahmatullah has moved for summary judgment on damages. For reasons set forth herein, Super 8's motion is granted with respect to Count III ( liquidated damages). Because Rahmatullah failed to respond meaningfully to Super 8's motion for summary judgment on Count VI (guaranty) or on his counterclaims of fraud, bad faith, and breach of contract, Super 8's motion on those claims is also granted. Super 8's motion is denied with respect to Counts I (Lanham Act claims) and IV (Recurring Fees). Rahmatullah's motion is denied in its entirety. Signed by Judge David Frank Hamilton on 9/9/2009. (LBK)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 9, 2009

Filing 68 ENTRY ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Super 8 moved for summary judgment on Counts I (Lanham Act claims), III (liquidated damages for early termination of the Franchise Agreement), IV (Recurring Fees owed under the Franchise Agreement), and V I (Rahmatullah's guaranty of Franchise Agreement) and on each of Rahmatullah's counterclaims. Rahmatullah has moved for summary judgment on damages. For reasons set forth herein, Super 8's motion is granted with respect to Count III ( liquidated damages). Because Rahmatullah failed to respond meaningfully to Super 8's motion for summary judgment on Count VI (guaranty) or on his counterclaims of fraud, bad faith, and breach of contract, Super 8's motion on those claims is also granted. Super 8's motion is denied with respect to Counts I (Lanham Act claims) and IV (Recurring Fees). Rahmatullah's motion is denied in its entirety. Signed by Judge David Frank Hamilton on 9/9/2009. (LBK)

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 Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: SUPER 8 MOTELS, INC. v. RAHMATULLAH
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: SUPER 8 MOTELS, INC.
Represented By:	James L. Petersen
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: ABU M. RAHMATULLAH
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?