Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Budget Blinds, Inc. v. Hayman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


September 4, 2009

BUDGET BLINDS, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF,
v.
LYLE A. HAYMAN SR., AN INDIVIDUAL; REBECCA A. HAYMAN, AN INDIVIDUAL; AND LYLE HAYMAN JR. AN INDIVIDUAL, DEFENDANTS.

STIPULATED JUDGMENT AND ORDER

Plaintiff BUDGET BLINDS, INC. ("BBI") commenced this action by filing the Complaint and serving Defendants LYLE A. HAYMAN SR. and REBECCA A. HAYMAN. (collectively "the Haymans") with the summons and the Complaint. The parties, represented by the attorneys whose names appear hereafter, have agreed to settlement of this action without adjudication of any issue of fact or law, and without the Haymans admitting to any contested issues of fact or to liability for any of the violations alleged in the Complaint.

THEREFORE, on the joint motion of BBI and the Haymans, it is hereby

ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows:

FINDINGS

1. The United States District Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332 and 1441(b). Specifically, this is a civil case between citizens of different states and the matter in controversy exceeds the sum of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs.

2. Venue is proper in the Central District of California because the operative agreement between BBI and Defendant LYLE A. HAYMAN SR. specifically provides that this Court is the proper venue for any action arising under the parties' agreement.

3. The Complaint states a claim upon which relief may be granted against the Haymans for Breach of Written Contract, Civil Conspiracy for Unfair Competition, Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage, Negligent Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage and Injunctive Relief.

4. The Haymans, and each of them, have entered into this Stipulated Judgment and Order ("Order") freely and without coercion. The Haymans further acknowledge that they have read the provisions of this Order and are prepared to abide by them.

5. BBI and the Haymans hereby waive all rights to appeal or otherwise challenge or contest the validity of this Order.

ORDER

I. COMPLIANCE WITH THE NON-COMPETITION PROVISION OF THE LICENSE AGREEMENT

IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Haymans shall represent and warrant that they have discontinued any and all businesses in competition with BBI or any of BBI's franchised businesses, and agree to not directly, or indirectly, for themselves, or through, on behalf of or in conjunction with any other person, for a continuously uninterrupted period of two years, beginning on April 1, 2009, own, maintain, operate, engage in, or have any financial or beneficial interest in (including any interest in corporations, partnerships, trusts, unincorporated associations or joint ventures), advise, assist, or make loans to, any competitor that is, or is intended to be, located within a 25 mile radius the Budget Blinds(r) Licensed territory identified in the license agreement as zip codes 48083, 48085, 48098 and 48310, all within the State of Michigan (the "Budget Blinds Licensed Territory"), or of any Budget Blinds(r) business in existence as of the date of execution of this Order. The term "competitor" shall include, by way of illustration without limiting the meaning thereof, any company that conducts similar operations within and markets their products and/or services in the Budget Blinds Licensed Territoryor within a 25 mile radius of any Budget Blinds(r) business in existence as of the date of the execution of this Order.

II. FEES AND COSTS

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that each party to this Order hereby agrees to bear its own costs and attorneys' fees incurred in connection with this action.

III. RETENTION OF JURISDICTION

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Court shall retain jurisdiction of this matter for the purpose of enabling the parties to apply to the Court at any time for such further orders and directives as may be necessary or appropriate for the interpretation or modification of this Order, or for the enforcement of compliance therewith.

IV. COMPLETE SETTLEMENT

The parties, by their respective counsel, hereby consent to entry of the forgoing Order which shall constitute a final judgment and order in this matter with respect to the parties. The parties further stipulate and agree that the entry of the foregoing Order shall constitute a full, complete and final settlement of this action.

CAUTION - - This is a Stipulation for Entry of Judgment. Read it carefully before signing.

I have carefully read the foregoing Stipulation for Entry of Judgment and know the contents thereof, and I sign the same as my own free act.

SO ORDERED this 4th day of September, 2009.

Hon. A. Howard Matz, Dept. 14 United States District Judge

DATED: August 25, 2009

BUDGET BLINDS, INC.

By: _________________________________

Its:

By: _________________________________

LYLE A. HAYMAN SR.

By:_________________________________

REBECCA A. HAYMAN

20090904

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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