Jarvis v. Taylor et al (JOINT ASSIGN)(MAG2)

Filing 29

ORDERED that the Recommendation (Doc. # 27 ) is ADOPTED. Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows: 1. Counterclaim Defendant Christopher Jarvis's motion to dismiss (Doc. # 13 ) is GRANTED IN PART as to (1) Counterclaimants' breach of lo yalty1 claim (Count VI), which is dismissed with prejudice, and (2) Counterclaimant's negligence claim (Count V), which is dismissed without prejudice. In all other respects, Counterclaim Defendant Christopher Jarvis's motion to dismiss (Doc. # 13 ) is DENIED. 2. This action is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for additional proceedings. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 4/17/2018. (kh, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
CHRISTOPHER JARVIS,
Plaintiff/Counterclaim
Defendant,
v.
T. BRITT TAYLOR, et al.,
Defendants/
Counterclaimants.

)
)
)
)
)
) CASE NO. 2:17-CV-396-WKW
)
)
)
)
)
ORDER

On February 12, 2018, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation to
which no timely objections have been filed. (Doc. # 27.) Upon an independent
review of the record and upon consideration of the Recommendation, it is
ORDERED that the Recommendation (Doc. # 27) is ADOPTED. Accordingly, it
is ORDERED as follows:
1.

Counterclaim Defendant Christopher Jarvis’s motion to dismiss (Doc. # 13)

is GRANTED IN PART as to (1) Counterclaimants’ breach of loyalty1 claim
(Count VI), which is dismissed with prejudice, and (2) Counterclaimant’s
1

In response to the motion to dismiss, Counterclaimants did not cite Ala. Code 1975 §
10A-5A-4.08, which pertains to the duty of loyalty a “person who has the authority to direct and
oversee the activities and affairs of a limited liability company owes to the limited liability
company and to the members of the limited liability company.” Ala. Code 1975 § 10A-5A4.08(a)(1). Neither did they demonstrate that § 10A-5A-4.08 is applicable to Count VI and the
facts alleged in the counterclaim complaint; nor did they argue that Alabama law recognizes an
independent claim for breach of the duty of loyalty in derogation of § 10A-5A-4.08.

negligence claim (Count V), which is dismissed without prejudice. In all other
respects, Counterclaim Defendant Christopher Jarvis’s motion to dismiss (Doc. #
13) is DENIED.
2.

This action is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for additional

proceedings.
DONE this 17th day of April, 2018.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2