Meth Lab Cleanup, LLC v. Spaulding Decon, LLC et al

Filing 70

ORDER: Plaintiff Meth Lab Cleanup, LLC's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 49 is GRANTED in part, to the extent that it seeks judgment on Count V of Defendants' Counterclaim. To all other relief sought in the motion, it is DENIED as moot. Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 57 is DENIED. Signed by Judge James S. Moody, Jr on 12/23/2015. (LN)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
METH LAB CLEANUP, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 8:14-cv-3129-T-30TBM

SPAULDING DECON, LLC and
LAURA SPAULDING,
Defendants.

ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the parties competing motions for partial
summary judgment (Dkts. # 49 and 57, respectively) on Count V of Defendants’
Counterclaim (Dkt. 32). That count alleges that Plaintiff breached a settlement agreement
the parties entered into in 2012 by threatening Defendants with a lawsuit and ultimately
filing a breach of contract suit. The Court has reviewed the filings, the record evidence,
and the applicable law. For the reasons discussed below, Plaintiff’s motion for summary
judgment will be granted in part.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
The parties to this lawsuit are long-time competitors in the crime-scene cleanup and
decontamination business. Their motions concern Defendants’ use of the phrase “meth lab
cleanup.” So did a previous lawsuit that the parties settled in 2012, as does this lawsuit,
which Plaintiff filed in 2014 alleging a breach of that settlement agreement. So does a
previous summary judgment motion, filed by Plaintiff, which the Court partially granted

in July 2015. And so does a contempt motion, again filed by Plaintiff, on which the Court
held a hearing and ruled on in November 2015.
Given this procedural history, the Court will not recount legal and factual findings,
but will instead incorporate those findings as they were detailed in the Court’s previous
summary judgment order and motion for contempt order (Dkts. 39 and 63). See Meth Lab
Cleanup, LLC v. Spaulding Decon, LLC, No. 8:14-cv-3129-T-30-TBM, 2015 WL
4496193, *1 (M.D. Fla. July 23, 2015); Meth Lab Cleanup, 2015 WL 6538691, *1 (M.D.
Fla. Oct. 28, 2015).
By way of those orders and a hearing on the motion for contempt, the Court has
already ordered the Defendants to remove all instances of, and enjoined Defendants from
all uses of “meth lab cleanup,” in any letter case combination except all lowercase: (1) on
any website controlled, possessed, or owned by Defendants; and (2) on the metadata of any
website controlled, possessed, or owned by Defendants.
These orders also make clear that Defendants were at least partially in breach of the
settlement agreement that gave rise to this lawsuit, which is to say there exists no genuine
issue of material fact as to Count V. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322, 106
S. Ct. 2548, 91 L. Ed. 2d 265 (1986). To the extent Plaintiff’s motion seeks judgment on
Count V of Defendants’ counter-claim, it will be granted. See id. As to all other relief
sought in the motion, it will be denied as moot. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment
will be denied.
It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:

2

1. Plaintiff Meth Lab Cleanup, LLC’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Dkt.
49) is GRANTED in part, to the extent that it seeks judgment on Count V of
Defendants’ Counterclaim. To all other relief sought in the motion, it is DENIED
as moot.
2. Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Dkt. 57) is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 23rd day of December, 2015.

Copies furnished to:
Counsel/Parties of Record
S:\Odd\2014\14-cv-3129 - SJ Count V.docx

3