BREEN v. MILLARD GROUP, INC. et al

Filing 36

ORDER THAT THE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BY DEFENDANTS COCA-COLA REFRESHMENTS USA INC., IS GRANTED. ALL CLAIMS AGAINST COCA-COLA REFRESHMENTS USA INC., AND ALL CROSS CLAIMS BY COCA-COLA REFRESHMENTS USA INC., ARE DIDMSISSED WITH PREJUDICE. THE MOTI ON FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT FILED BY DEFENDANTS MILLARD MALL SERVICES, INC., SD PROPERTY GROUP, INC., SIMON PROPERTY GROUP (DELAWARE), INC., SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, L.P., SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, INC., FRANKLIN MILLS, GP, INC. AND FRANK MILLS, LLC, IS GRANTE D IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. THAT PART OF DEFENDANTS' MOTION THAT SEEKS SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANT MILLARD MALL SERVICES IS GRANTED. ALL CLAIMS AGAINST MILLARD MALL SERVICES, INC., AND ALL CROSS CLAIMS BY A ND AGAINST MILLARD MALL SERVICES, INC., ARE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. THE MOTION IS DENIED IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT A TELEPHONE CONFERENCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF SCHEDULING FURTHER PROCEEDINGS WILL BE CONDUCTED IN DUE COURSE. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JAN E. DUBOIS ON 11/9/2016. 11/10/2016 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(sg, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA DIANE BREEN, CIVIL ACTION Plaintiff, v. MILLARD GROUP, INC., also known as “THE MILLARD GROUP,” SD PROPERTY GROUP, INC., SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, L.P., SIMON PROPERTY GROUP (DELAWARE), INC., SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, INC., FRANKLIN MILLS GP, INC., FRANKLIN MILLS, LLC, and PHILADELPHIA COCA-COLA BOTTLING CO., Defendants. NO. 13-6926 ORDER AND NOW, this 9th day of November, 2016, upon consideration of defendants Millard Mall Services, Inc., incorrectly identified as Millard Group, Inc., a/k/a “The Millard Group,” SD Property Group, Inc., Simon Property Group (Delaware), Inc., Simon Property Group, L.P., Simon Property Group, Inc., Franklin Mills, GP, Inc. and Franklin Mills, LLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Document No. 27, filed Apr. 7, 2016) and defendant Coca-Cola Refreshments USA Inc.’s, incorrectly identified as Philadelphia Coca-Cola Bottling Co., Motion for Summary Judgment (Document No. 28, filed Apr. 8, 2016), plaintiff’s Memorandum of Law in Opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Millard Mall Services, Inc., et al (Document No. 31, filed May 12, 2016), and Reply Brief in Support of the Motion for Summary Judgment of Defendants, Millard Mall Services, Inc., SD Property Group, Inc., Simon Property Group (Delaware), Inc., Simon Property Group, L.P., Simon Property Group, Inc., Franklin Mills, GP, Inc. and Franklin Mills, LLC (Document No. 32, filed May 18, 2016), for the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum dated October 25, 2016, IT IS ORDERED as follows: 1. The Motion for Summary Judgment filed by defendant Coca-Cola Refreshments USA Inc., incorrectly identified as Philadelphia Coca-Cola Bottling Co., is GRANTED. All claims against Coca-Cola Refreshments USA Inc., and all cross claims by and against Coca-Cola Refreshments USA Inc., are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 2. The Motion for Summary Judgment filed by defendants Millard Mall Services, Inc., SD Property Group, Inc., Simon Property Group (Delaware), Inc., Simon Property Group, L.P., Simon Property Group, Inc., Franklin Mills, GP, Inc. and Franklin Mills, LLC, is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART, as follows: a. That part of defendants’ Motion that seek summary judgment as to plaintiff’s claim against defendant Millard Mall Services, Inc., incorrectly identified as Millard Group, Inc., a/k/a “The Millard Group,” is GRANTED. All claims against Millard Mall Services, Inc., and all cross claims by and against Millard Mall Services, Inc., are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; b. The Motion is DENIED in all other respects. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a telephone conference for the purpose of scheduling further proceedings will be conducted in due course. BY THE COURT: /s/ Hon. Jan E. DuBois DuBOIS, JAN E., J.

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?