Buttner v. RD Palmer Enterprises, Inc. et al

Plaintiff: Brian R. Buttner
Defendant: RD Palmer Enterprises, Inc., Richard Palmer, Rich and Gardner Construction Company Inc., Dunn & Sgromo Engineers, PLLC and Robert Charles Abbott, Jr.
Case Number: 5:2013cv00342
Filed: March 26, 2013
Court: New York Northern District Court
Office: Syracuse Office
County: Tompkins
Referring Judge: Andrew T. Baxter
Presiding Judge: Lawrence E. Kahn
Nature of Suit: Copyright
Cause of Action: 17:101 Copyright Infringement
Jury Demanded By: Defendant

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
March 31, 2015 145 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDERED, that Plaintiffs Motion (Dkt. No. 77) for partial summary judgment against Defendants RD Palmer Enterprises, Inc., Richard Palmer, and Rich and Gardner Construction Company, Inc. is DENIED; and it is further ORDERED, t hat Defendant Rich and Gardner Construction Company, Inc.s Cross-Motion (Dkt. No. 83) for partial summary judgment is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED, that Defendant Rich and Gardner Construction Company, Inc.s Motion (Dkt. No. 89) for partial sum mary judgment is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED, that Plaintiffs copyright infringement claims against Defendant Rich and Gardner Construction Company, Inc. are DISMISSED and Defendant Rich and Gardner Construction Company, Inc. is DISMISSED from this action; and it is further ORDERED, that Defendants Richard Palmer and RD Palmer Enterprises, Inc.s Cross-Motion (Dkt. No. 84) for summary judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, consistent with this Memorandum-Decision and Order; and it is further ORDERED, that Plaintiffs copyright infringement claims against Defendants Richard Palmer and RD Palmer Enterprises, Inc. are DISMISSED; and it is further ORDERED, that Defendant Rich and Gardner Construction Company, Inc.s Motion (Dkt. No . 89) for summary judgment is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED, that Defendant Rich and Gardner Construction Company, Inc.s Second Motion (Dkt. No. 133) for summary judgment is DENIED as moot; and it is further ORDERED, that Defendant Robert Charle s Abbott, Jr.s Motion (Dkt. No. 91) for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED as moot; and it is further ORDERED, that Defendant Robert Charles Abbott, Jr.s Motion (Dkt. No. 93) for summary judgment is DENIED as moot; and it is furtherORDERED, that Pla intiffs Letter Motion (Dkt. No. 98) to withdraw claims against Defendant Robert Charles Abbott, Jr. is DENIED as moot; and it is further ORDERED, that all claims against Defendant Robert Charles Abbott, Jr. are DISMISSED with prejudice and Defendant Robert Charles Abbott, Jr. is DISMISSED from this action; and it is further ORDERED, that Defendant Rich and Gardner Construction Company, Inc.s Motion (Dkt. No. 124) to preclude Plaintiffs damages expert is DENIED as moot; and it is further ORDERED, that Defendant Dunn & Sgromo Engineers, PLLC Motion (Dkt. No. 131) for summary judgment is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED, that Plaintiffs copyright infringement claims against Defendant Dunn & Sgromo Engineers, PLLCs are DISMISSED and Defendant Dunn & Sgromo Engineers, PLLC is DISMISSED from this action; and it is further ORDERED, that Plaintiffs Letter Motion (Dkt. No. 143) to strike is DENIED as moot; and it is further ORDERED, that if Plaintiff wishes to maintain this action in the Nort hern District, he must file within thirty (30) days of the date of this Memorandum-Decision and Order a memorandum of law asserting the basis for the Court to exercise subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiffs remaining breach of contract claim aga inst Defendants Richard Palmer and RD Palmer Enterprises, Inc. Defendants may file a response within ten (10) days of Plaintiffs memorandum. If Plaintiff fails or elects not to file a memorandum of law on the issue of subject matter jurisdiction, the Clerk shall close this case. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on March 31, 2015. (sas)
November 27, 2013 59 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDERED, that Defendants Rich & Gardner, Palmer, and Dunn & Sgromos Motion (Dkt. No. 44) for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED, that Plaintiffs unjust enrichment and unfair competition claims are DISMISSED as against Defendants Rich & Gardner, Palmer, and Dunn & Sgromo; and it is further ORDERED, that Plaintiffs copyright infringement and breach-of-contract claims are DISMISSED as against Defendants Rich & Gardner, Palmer, and Dunn & Sgromo i nsofar as they seek punitive damages; and it is further ORDERED, that Plaintiffs copyright infringement claim is DISMISSED as against Defendants Rich & Gardner, Palmer, and Dunn & Sgromo insofar as it seeks attorneys fees and statutory damages. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on November 27, 2013. (sas)

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 New York Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Buttner v. RD Palmer Enterprises, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Brian R. Buttner
Represented By: Rachel A. Abbott
Represented By: James P. O'Brien
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: RD Palmer Enterprises, Inc.
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Richard Palmer
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Rich and Gardner Construction Company Inc.
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Dunn & Sgromo Engineers, PLLC
Represented By: David R. DuFlo
Represented By: Kevin E. Hulslander
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Robert Charles Abbott, Jr.
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 [ 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.