Home Design Services, Inc. v. Schroeder Construction et al

Filing 147

ORDER denying 101 Defendants Motion for Partial Summary Judgment by Judge William J. Martinez on 11/22/2011.(ervsl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge William J. Martínez
Civil Action No. 09-cv-01437-WJM-GJR
HOME DESIGN SERVICES, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
SCHROEDER CONSTRUCTION, and
JAMES E. SCHROEDER,
Defendants.

ORDER ON MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

The matter is before the Court on Defendants Schroeder Construction and
James E. Schroeder’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Plaintiff’s claims for
attorney’s fees and statutory damages (ECF No. 101) (the “Motion”). The Court has
federal question jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a).
The Court has reviewed the briefing on the Motion, and considered the
arguments, authorities, and evidence presented by the parties. The issues raised by
the Motion are fully briefed, obviating the necessity for an evidentiary hearing or oral
argument. Thus, the Motion stands submitted on the briefs. Cf. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c) and
(d); Geear v. Boulder Community Hospital, 844 F.2d 764, 766 (10th Cir.1988) (hearing
requirement for Rule 56(a) motion satisfied by court's review of written filings and
evidence of record).
Based on the Court’s review of the record it is apparent that there exist genuine
issues of material fact with regards to Plaintiff’s claims for attorney’s fees and statutory

damages. It is black-letter law that the Court must resolve any factual ambiguities
against the moving party, thus favoring the right to trial. Quaker State Mini-Lube, Inc. v.
Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., 52 F.3d 1522, 1527 (10th Cir. 1995). Given these disputed
issues of fact, summary disposition of these claims is not appropriate.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1)

Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 101) is
hereby DENIED.

Dated this 22nd day of November, 2011.
BY THE COURT:

United States District Judge

2