Bio-Behavioral Care Solutions, LLC v. Doctors Behavioral Hospital, LLC

Filing 74

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF/COUNTER DEFENDANT'S RENEWED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [DOC. 51]. Signed by District Judge Avern Cohn. (MVer)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

BIO-BEHAVIORAL CARE SOLUTIONS, INC.,
A Michigan limited liability company,
Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant,
v.

Case No. 14-14123

DOCTORS BEHAVIORAL HOSPITAL, LLC.,
d/b/a Doctors Neuropsychiatric Hospital,
an Indiana limited liability company,

HON. AVERN COHN

Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff.
________________________________/
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT’S RENEWED MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Doc. 51)
This is a contract case. Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant Bio-Behavioral Care
Solutions, LLC is suing defendant/counter-plaintiff Doctors Behavioral Hospital, LLC
claiming that defendant breached a contract (Marketing Agreement) between the
parties. In broad terms, plaintiff performs marketing services for hospitals which it says
results in hospitals obtaining business relationships with long term care facilities that
use the services offered by the hospitals. Defendant, a hospital in Indiana, was
interested in building relationships with nursing homes and assisted care facilities in
Western Michigan. In early 2013, defendant and plaintiff entered in a Marketing
Agreement under which plaintiff agreed to provide management and consulting services
to defendant. Plaintiff says that it provided the required services under the Marketing
Agreement and defendant has refused to pay. Defendant says that plaintiff breached
the Marketing Agreement by failing to fulfill its obligations, i.e. it did not perform the

marketing and consulting services. Both sides seek money damages.
Before the Court is plaintiff’s renewed motion for summary judgment (Doc. 51)
contending that there is no genuine issue of material fact that defendant has breached
the Marketing Agreement. The Court has reviewed the motion papers and
supplemental filings. The Court is satisfied that the record contains factual disputes as
to whether plaintiff provided the services under the Marketing Agreement and whether
the Marketing Agreement was properly terminated. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.

_s/Avern Cohn
AVERN COHN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: 4/11/2018
Detroit, Michigan

2