NEWSPRING MEZZANINE CAPITAL II, L.P. v. HAYES et al

Filing 292

ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF NEWSPRING'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 269 IS DENIED IN IT ENTIRETY. DEFENDANTS BAXTER MCLINDON HAYES, III, AND JARROD TYSON HAYES'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 263 IS GRANTED AS TO COUNTS IV AND X, AND DENIED AS T O THE REMAINING COUNTS. DEFENDANTS BAXTER MCLINDON HAYES, JR., AND UTILIPATH HOLDINGS, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO CERTAIN CLAIMS 266 IS GRANTED AS TO COUNTS IV AND X, AND DENIED AS TO THE REMAINING COUNTS. COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANTS NEWSPRING MEZZANINE CAPITAL II, L.P., STEVEN HOBMAN, AND AMY CHRSTENSEN'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 268 IS DENIED IN ITS ENTIRETY. DEFENDANT UTILIPATH LLC'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO CERTAIN CROSSCLAIMS 265 IS DENIED. DEFENDA NTS BAXTER MCLINDON HAYES, III, AND JARROD TYSON HAYES'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AS TO CERTAIN CROSSCLAIMS 264 , AND DEFENDANTS BAXTER MCLINDON HAYES, JR., AND UTILIPATH HOLDINGS, INC.'S IDENTICAL MOTION 267 ARE BOTH GRANTED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE GERALD A. MCHUGH ON 12/23/16. 12/23/16 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(ti, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

NEWSPRING MEZZANINE
CAPITAL II, L.P.,
Plaintiff,

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

v.
BAXTER MCLINDON HAYES, JR. et al.,
Defendants.

MCHUGH, J.

CIVIL ACTION
No. 14-1706

DECEMBER 23, 2016
ORDER

This 23rd day of December, 2016, upon consideration of (1) Plaintiff NewSpring
Mezzanine Capital II, L.P.’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 269), and the responses
and the replies thereto; (2) Defendants Baxter McLindon Hayes, III, and Jarrod Tyson Hayes’s
Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 263), and the responses and replies thereto;
(3) Defendants Baxter McLindon Hayes, Jr., and Utilipath Holdings, Inc.’s Motion for Summary
Judgment as to Certain Claims (ECF No. 266), and the responses and replies thereto; (4)
Counterclaim Defendants NewSpring Mezzanine Capital II, L.P., Steven Hobman, and Amy
Christensten’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 268), and the responses and the replies
thereto; (5) Defendant Utilipath LLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to Certain Crossclaims
(ECF No. 265); and (6) Defendants Baxter McLindon Hayes, III, and Jarrod Tyson Hayes’s
Motion for Summary Judgment as to Certain Crossclaims (ECF No. 264), and Defendants Baxter
McLindon Hayes, Jr., and Utilipath Holdings, Inc.’s identical Motion (ECF No. 267), it is hereby
ORDERED that:

1

1. Plaintiff NewSpring’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 269) is DENIED in
its entirety.
2. Defendants Baxter McLindon Hayes, III, and Jarrod Tyson Hayes’s Motion for
Summary Judgment (ECF No. 263) is GRANTED as to Counts IV and X, and
DENIED as to the remaining counts.
3. Defendants Baxter McLindon Hayes, Jr., and Utilipath Holdings, Inc.’s Motion for
Summary Judgment as to Certain Claims (ECF No. 266) is GRANTED as to Counts
IV and X, and DENIED as to the remaining counts.
4. Counterclaim Defendants NewSpring Mezzanine Capital II, L.P., Steven Hobman,
and Amy Christensen’s Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 268) is DENIED
in its entirety.
5. Defendant Utilipath LLC’s Motion for Summary Judgment as to Certain Crossclaims
(ECF No. 265) is DENIED.
6. Defendants Baxter McLindon Hayes, III, and Jarrod Tyson Hayes’s Motion for
Summary Judgment as to Certain Crossclaims (ECF No. 264), and Defendants Baxter
McLindon Hayes, Jr., and Utilipath Holdings, Inc.’s identical Motion (ECF No. 267)
are both GRANTED.

/s/ GERALD AUSTIN MCHUGH
Gerald Austin McHugh
United States District Judge

2