BRITT INTERACTIVE LLC et al v. A3 MEDIA LLC et al
| BRITT INTERACTIVE LLC, JOSHUA BROWN and TOWNEPOST NETWORK INC. |
| A3 MEDIA LLC, CHILLY PANDA MEDIA, LLC, COLLECTIVE PUBLISHING LLC, NEIL LUCAS, YELENA LUCAS, JANELLE MORRISON, DANN VELDKAMP and JODY VELDKAMP |
| A3 MEDIA LLC, CHILLY PANDA MEDIA, LLC, COLLECTIVE PUBLISHING LLC, NEIL LUCAS, YELENA LUCAS, JANELLE MORRISON, DANN VELDKAMP and JODY VELDKAMP |
| A3 MEDIA LLC, CHILLY PANDA MEDIA, LLC, COLLECTIVE PUBLISHING LLC, NEIL LUCAS, YELENA LUCAS, JANELLE MORRISON, DANN VELDKAMP and JODY VELDKAMP |
| JEANNE BRITT, TOM BRITT, BRITT INTERACTIVE LLC, JOSH BROWN, JOSHUA BROWN, TONI FOLZENLOGEL and TOWNEPOST NETWORK INC. |
| JEANNE BRITT, TOM BRITT, BRITT INTERACTIVE LLC, JOSHUA BROWN and TOWNEPOST NETWORK INC. |
| 1:2016cv02884 |
| October 24, 2016 |
| U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Debra McVicker Lynch |
| Tanya Walton Pratt |
| Trademark |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal |
| Both |
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
372
ORDER ON CONSOLIDATED APPLICATION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES - The Consolidated Application seeks an award of $88,933.45. This amount is net of a $1,000.00 sanction the Court issued against the Britt Parties. The Court makes the following reductions of the amount sought: (1) $4,833.00 for fees not encompassed by the awards; (2) $5,980.50 for inefficiencies; (3) $1,923.50 for tasks that were essentially clerical in nature; and (4) $9,496.02 to account for some la ck of success on the Motion for Contempt. Therefore, the Consolidated Application for Attorneys' Fees (Filing No. 293 ) is GRANTED and the Court awards the Britt Parties an amended total award of $66,700.43. All Defendants except Janelle Morrison (who was not subject to the TRO) are jointly and severally liable for this amount. (See Order.) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 3/26/2019. (NAD)
|
|
Filing
351
ENTRY ON BRITT PARTIES' 319 MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION - In light of this controlling and directly applicable case law from the Seventh Circuit, the Court will not deny as untimely or strike from the record the Lucas Parties' Motion to Dismiss docketed at Filing No. 294 . Instead, the Court will treat the Motion as a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings under Rule 12(c). With this clarification provided to the parties, the Britt Parties are granted leave to file their Answer t o the counterclaims and third-party claims pled in the Lucas Parties' Answer at Filing No. 62 within seven (7) days of the Court's Order. The pending Motion to Dismiss, now treated as a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, is fully bri efed and ripe for the Court's ruling. Also pending before the Court are motions for partial summary judgment filed by the Britt Parties and the Lucas Parties (Filing No. 335 ; Filing No. 338 ). These motions also are fully briefed and ripe for the Court's ruling. The Court will rule on these other motions in due course. The Britt Parties' Motion for Clarification (Filing No. 319 ) is GRANTED. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 2/5/2019. (NAD)
|
|
Filing
280
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 251 Report and Recommendations. See order for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 3/5/2018. (MEJ)
|
|
Filing
279
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 257 Report and Recommendations, 210 Motion for Default Judgment filed by TOM BRITT, BRITT INTERACTIVE LLC, JEANNE BRITT, TOWNEPOST NETWORK INC. See order for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 3/5/2018. (MEJ)
|
|
Filing
203
ENTRY ON MOTION TO DISMISS - For the reasons stated above, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Joshua Brown's Motion to Dismiss (Filing No. 132 ), and GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the Britt Parties' Motion for Partial Dismis sal (Filing No. 134 ). The Motions to Dismiss as they relate to the Counterclaimants' claims of tortious interference with business relationships, defamation, and franchise fraud under Ind. Code § 23-2-2.5-27 are dismissed without prej udice. However, the Motions to Dismiss with regard to the Counterclaimants' franchise fraud claim under Ind. Code § 23-2-2.7-2 are dismissed with prejudice. Furthermore, the Motions to Dismiss in relation to Brown's immunity defense and the Britt Parties' anti-SLAPP defenses are DENIED. The Counterclaimants are granted leave of twenty-one days (21) from the date of this Entry within which to file an Amended Counterclaim and Third- Party Complaint, if any. (See Entry.) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 5/16/2017. (JLS)
|
|
Filing
22
ENTRY on Pending Motions. The Court GRANTS Plaintiffs' Motion to Extend the Temporary Restraining Order and the TRO is extended until November 14 at 3:00 pm. 11 . The Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants' Motion for Exte nsion of Time to Respond. 20 . The motion is granted in that Defendants have until the end of the day on October 31, 2016 to file their response, and denied in that the Court is extending the TRO until November 14, 2016. Further, the Court refers Plaintiffs' Motion to Hold Defendants in Contempt (Filing No. 17) to Magistrate Judge Dinsmore to issue a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 10/31/2016. (MAC)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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 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.
