Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Potts v. Maryland Games, LLC

United States District Court, D. Maryland, Southern Division

September 27, 2019

KRISTEN H. POTTS, Plaintiff,
v.
MARYLAND GAMES, LLC, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION

          Charles B. Day, United States Magistrate Judge.

         Before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (“Plaintiff's Motion”)(ECF 54). The Court has reviewed Plaintiff's Motion and the opposition thereto. No hearing is deemed necessary. Local Rule 105.6 (D. Md.). For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion.

         I. Standard for Review

         A court may grant summary judgment, “when the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23 (1986); Felty v. Graves-Humphreys, 818 F.2d 1126, 1128 (4th Cir. 1987). The Court must view facts and all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party in order to ascertain whether a genuine issue of material fact exists. Pulliam Inv. Co. v. Cameo Properties, Inc., 810 F.2d 1282, 1286 (4th Cir. 1987); Ross v. Communications Satellite Corp., 759 F.2d 355, 364 (4th Cir. 1985). However, the mere existence of some disputed facts does not automatically foreclose summary judgment. Thompson Everett, Inc. v. National Cable Advertising L.P., 57 F.3d 1317, 1322 (4th Cir. 1995). “Factual disputes that are irrelevant or unnecessary will not be counted.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). Rather, the disputed facts must be “material to an issue necessary for the proper resolution of the case, ” and “the quality and quantity of evidence offered to create a question of fact must be adequate to support a jury verdict.” Thompson, 57 F.3d at 1323.

         The burden of demonstrating that no genuine issue of fact exists and that one is entitled to judgment as a matter of law is on the moving party. Barwick v. Celotex Corp., 736 F.2d 946, 958 (4th Cir. 1984). The ultimate question is whether a reasonable fact finder could return a verdict for the non-movant or whether the movant, at trial, would be entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See, Celotex, 477 U.S. at 327; Shealy v. Winston, 929 F.2d 1009, 1012 (4th Cir. 1991).

         II. Analysis

         Plaintiff seeks summary judgment on the claim of conversion.

         A. Undisputed Material Facts

         The Court accepts the undisputed material facts as set forth in the Joint Statement of the parties.

1. On October 16, 2015, a company called Technology Exclusive, Inc. (“TE”) executed a promissory note in favor of Plaintiff in the amount of $1.5 million (“Promissory Note”).
2. Pursuant to the Promissory Note, TE was to make interest-only monthly payments to Plaintiff for a period of three years, with the principal sum due and payable on or before October 16, 2018.
3. The Promissory Note states that TE will be in default if, among other things, TE failed to pay any amounts due thereunder within the cure period or if TE breached any term of condition of the Security Agreement executed contemporaneously therewith.
4. To secure the timely payment and performance of its obligations to Plaintiff, TE executed a Security Agreement dated October 16, 2015, which granted Plaintiff a first priority security interest in all of TE's personal property (the “Collateral”), which is described with particularity in Section 1 of the Security Agreement as follows:
All of the personal property of the Debtor, wherever located, and now owned or hereafter acquired, including . . . and, to the extent not listed above as original collateral, all other assets, personal property and rights of the Debtor, whether tangible or intangible, including but not limited to . . . gaming machines . . . exclusive ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.