NATIONAL ASSET CONSULTANTS LLC v. MIDWEST HOLDINGS-INDIANAPOLIS, LLC et al
||NATIONAL ASSET CONSULTANTS LLC
||F.C. TUCKER COMPANY, INC., DAVID HENNESSY, SARI MANDRESH, MIDWEST HOLDINGS-INDIANAPOLIS, LLC and VICKIE YASER
||May 25, 2018
||US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
||Debra McVicker Lynch
||Tanya Walton Pratt
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
||28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|March 30, 2021
Order on Motions for Summary Judgment and Other Pending Motions - Hennessy and Yaser's motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 192 , is granted in part and denied in part. Midwest's motion for partial summary judgment, ECF No. 204), is gra nted in part and denied in part. NAC's motion for partial summary judgment, ECF No. 206 , is likewise granted in part and denied in part. Mandresh and F.C. Tucker's motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 214 , is granted. The outcome of these cross-motions is that no claims, crossclaims, or counterclaims survive for trial. Accordingly, final judgment will issue in a separate order. Some loose ends: As discussed above, Hennessy and Yaser's motion for sanctions, ECF No. 189 , is granted only to the extent that NAC must pay one-fourth the attorney fees associated with preparing the motion. The amount of such fees should be worked out between the parties; otherwise, Hennessy and Yaser are ordered to file fee documentati on within two weeks of this order's issuance. Additionally, Midwest's motion to reconsider, ECF No. 233 , is granted, and Midwest's motion to designate supplemental evidence, ECF No. 234 , is denied as moot. No award of attorney fees will issue apart from what the Court has already granted with respect to Hennessy and Yaser's motion for discovery sanctions. Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 3/30/2021. (JDC)
|May 30, 2018
ENTRY ON JURISDICTION - It has come to the Court's attention that Plaintiff's Complaint fails to allege all of the facts necessary to determine whether this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this case. The Complaint alleges tha t this Court has jurisdiction based upon diversity of citizenship. However, the Complaint fails to sufficiently allege the citizenship of Defendant F.C. Tucker Company, Inc. Citizenship is the operative consideration for jurisdictional purposes. t he Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a Supplemental Jurisdictional Statement that establishes the Court's jurisdiction over this case. This statement should specifically identify principal place of business of Defendant F.C. Tucker Company, Inc. This jurisdictional statement is due fourteen (14) days from the date of this Entry. (See Entry.) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 5/30/2018.(NAD)
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
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?