American Dairy Queen Corporation v. Blume et al
Plaintiff: American Dairy Queen Corporation
Defendant: Blume Investments, LLC, Royal Professional Solutions, LLC and Guy A. Blume
Case Number: 0:2011cv00358
Filed: February 11, 2011
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Office: DMN Office
County: Hennepin
Presiding Judge: Richard H. Kyle
Presiding Judge: Franklin L. Noel
Nature of Suit: Franchise
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
August 13, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 314 ORDER Adopting 307 Report and Recommendation, Overruling 308 Objections; Granting 287 Motion to Establish Damages; the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment against Defendant Guy A. Blume and in favor of Plaintiff American Dairy Queen Corporation ; American Dairy Queen Corporations claims against Defendants Blume Investments, LLC and Royal Professional Solutions, LLC are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and all of Defendant Blumes remaining outstanding Motions are DENIED AS MOOT. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Richard H. Kyle on 08/13/13. (kll)
April 23, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 285 ORDER Overruling 279 Objections; Adopting in its entirety 278 Report and Recommendation; granting 219 Motion for Sanctions; Striking [181-185], 188 , 191 , 194 , 199 , and 209 Motions, and Directing the Clerk of Court to enter Blume's default in this matter as a sanction; referring this matter to Magistrate Judge Leung to determine the appropriate amount of the money judgment to be entered; dismissing with prejudice 178 and 237 Blume's counterclaims; denying as moot Motions 167 , 201 , 212 , 213 , 227 , 230 , 233 , 238 , 240 , 251 , 262 , 272 , and 273 . (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Richard H. Kyle on 04/23/13. (kll)
November 26, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 263 ORDER overruling 256 Objections; denying 126 Motion to Dismiss, Transfer/Change Venue; Adopting 229 Report and Recommendation. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Richard H. Kyle on 11/26/12. (kll)
November 20, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 260 ORDER denying 258 Application on Proceed In Forma Pauperis on Appeal. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Richard H. Kyle on 11/20/12. (kll)
September 7, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 170 ORDER Adopting 153 Report and Recommendation; Overruling 162 Objections; Remanding this matter to Magistrate Judge Leung to determine an appropriate sanction to be imposed under Rule 11 for Blumes misconduct. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Richard H. Kyle on 09/07/12. (kll)cc: Guy Blume in Wausau WI Modified on 9/7/2012 (jam).
June 1, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 125 ORDER Affirming 121 Order; OVERRULING 123 Objections. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Richard H. Kyle on 06/01/12. (kll)cc: Guy A. Blume Modified on 6/1/2012 (jam).
March 26, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 106 ORDER denying 104 Motion to Disqualify District Judge. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Richard H. Kyle on 03/26/12. (kll)cc: Guy A. Blume Modified on 3/26/2012 (jam).
January 12, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 78 ORDER VACATING 76 Order and adopting 63 Report and Recommendation; Overruling 67 Objections; denying 34 Motion; denying without prejudice 37 ; directing Clerk of Court to enter default against Defendants Blume Investments LLC and Royal Professional Solutions, LLC. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Richard H. Kyle on 01/12/12. (kll)
January 11, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 76 ORDER denying 34 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction; denying without prejudice 37 Motion to Strike Answers; Adopting 63 Report and Recommendation; Overruling 67 Objections; pursuant to 48 Order to Show Cause, the Clerk of Court is directed to ENTER DEFAULT against Defendants Blume Investments, LLC and Royal Professional Solutions, LLC under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Richard H. Kyle on 01/11/12. (kll)
May 17, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 45 ORDER setting briefing schedule on Motion to Dismiss 34 and Motion to Strike Answers 37 . (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Richard H. Kyle on 05/17/11. (kll)
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 Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: American Dairy Queen Corporation v. Blume et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Blume Investments, LLC
Represented By: J Mark Dady
Represented By: Scott E Korzenowski
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: Royal Professional Solutions, LLC
Represented By: J Mark Dady
Represented By: Scott E Korzenowski
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: Guy A. Blume
Represented By: Scott E Korzenowski
Represented By: J Mark Dady
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 ]
Plaintiff: American Dairy Queen Corporation
Represented By: William L Killion
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?