Keyport Warehousing, Inc. v. Crown-Loxley I, LLC, No. 1:2022cv00100 - Document 83 (S.D. Ala. 2023)

Court Description: ORDER DENYING Dft/Counterclaim Plf's 60 Motion for Summary Judgment; GRANTING in part & DENYING in part Plf/Counterclaim Dft's 62 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; & DENYING Plf/Counterclaim Dft's 63 Motion to Exclude Proffered Expert Reports, Opinions & Testimony. The Court wil issue a Memorandum of Opinion and Order detailing the basis for this order within the next two (2) weeks. Signed by District Judge Terry F. Moorer on 9/29/23. (tot)

Download PDF
Keyport Warehousing, Inc. v. Crown-Loxley I, LLC Doc. 83 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION KEYPORT WAREHOUSING, INC., ) ) Plaintiff / Counterclaim Defendant, ) ) v. ) ) CROWN-LOXLEY I, LLC, ) ) Defendant / Counterclaim Plaintiff. ) CIV. ACT. NO. 1:22-cv-100-TFM-M ORDER Now pending before the Court are: (1) Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff, Crown-Loxley I, LLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 60, filed 2/24/23); (2) Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment as to Count I of Plaintiff’s Complaint and as to Defendant’s Amended Counterclaim (Doc. 62, filed 2/24/23); and (3) Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Proffered Expert Witness Reports, Opinions, and Testimony of Wesley C. Huang and Lewis E. Beville (Doc. 63, filed 2/24/23). Having considered the motions, responses, replies, the evidentiary submissions in support of the motions, and the relevant law, it is ORDERED as follows: 1. Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgmen (Doc. 60) is DENIED. 2. Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 62) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. It is granted as to Count I of the Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant’s Complaint (Doc. 1-2) and it is denied as to Defendant’s Amended Counterclaim (Doc. 24). Page 1 of 2 Dockets.Justia.com 3. Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant’s Motion to Exclude Proffered Expert Witness Reports, Opinions, and Testimony (Doc. 63) is DENIED as to full exclusion. The Court ultimately reviewed and considered the evidence presented, but found that even when considered, it did not change the result and therefore declines to wholesale exclude it. The Court notes that there are several evidentiary issues contained within the evidence which the Court will discuss further in its full Memorandum Opinion. In accordance with this shortform ruling, the Court shall issue a Memorandum of Opinion and Order detailing the basis for this order within the next two (2) weeks. DONE and ORDERED this the 29th day of September 2023. /s/ Terry F. Moorer TERRY F. MOORER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Page 2 of 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.