Texas Capital Bank, N.A. v. Dallas Roadster, Ltd. et al

Filing 181

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 101 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Dallas Roadster, Ltd., 46 Motion to Dismiss filed by Texas Capital Bank, N.A., 104 Motion for Summary Judgment,,,,, filed by Texas Capital Bank, N.A., 47 Motion to Dismiss filed by Texas Capital Bank, N.A., 72 Motion for Miscellaneous Relief filed by Dallas Roadster, Ltd., 173 Report and Recommendations, Order. 44 Motion to Dismiss filed by Texas Capital Bank, N.A.. The only claims remaining are TCBs breach of contract claim against DR and DRs breach of contract claim against TCB and any applicable claims for attorneys fees. Signed by Judge Richard A. Schell on 3/30/15. (cm, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SHERMAN DIVISION
TEXAS CAPITAL BANK, N.A.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

Plaintiff,
VS.
DALLAS ROADSTER, LTD., ET AL.
Defendants.

Case No. 4:13cv625

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORTS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Came on for consideration the reports of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action,
this matter having been heretofore referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636. On January 13, 2015, the report of the Magistrate Judge was entered containing
proposed findings of fact and recommendations that Dallas Roadster, Ltd.’s Motion to Reconsider
and Rescind Receivership Order (Dkt. 72) be DENIED. On March 4, 2015, the report of the
Magistrate Judge was entered containing proposed findings of fact and recommendations that
Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Dallas Roadster, Ltd.’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Dkt.
101) be DENIED in its entirety; that Plaintiff Texas Capital Bank’s (“TCB”) Motion for Summary
Judgment on All Claims and Counterclaims (Dkt. 104) be GRANTED as to all claims except TCB’s
breach of contract claim and Dallas Roadster, Ltd. and IEDA Enterprise, Inc.’s (collectively “DR”)
breach of contract counterclaim and DENIED as to the breach of contract claims; that Khobahy and
Hafezamini should take nothing by their counterclaims and those claims should be dismissed with

1

prejudice; that DR should take nothing by the counterclaims of fraud, negligent misrepresentation,
wrongful receivership, and the claim seeking a declaration of common law partnership or its
equivalent and those claims should be dismissed with prejudice.

The Magistrate Judge further

recommended that Plaintiff Texas Capital Bank’s Motion No. 1 to Dismiss First Amended
Counterclaims of Dallas Roadster, Ltd. (Dkt. 44), Plaintiff Texas Capital Bank’s Motion No. 2 to
Dismiss First Amended Counterclaims of Bahman Khobahy (Dkt. 46), and Plaintiff Texas Capital
Bank’s Motion No. 3 to Dismiss First Amended Counterclaims of Bahman Hafezamini (Dkt. 47)
should otherwise be DENIED as MOOT.
The court has made a de novo review of the objections raised to the reports along with any
responses thereto (see Dkts. 169, 171, 174, 175, 176, 177, 179 & 180), and is of the opinion that the
findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and the objections are without merit as
to the ultimate findings of the Magistrate Judge.

The court hereby adopts the findings and

conclusions of the Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this court.
Therefore, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
Plaintiff Texas Capital Bank’s Motion No. 1 to Dismiss First Amended Counterclaims of
Dallas Roadster, Ltd. (Dkt. 44) is DENIED as MOOT;
Plaintiff Texas Capital Bank’s Motion No. 2 to Dismiss First Amended Counterclaims of
Bahman Khobahy (Dkt. 46) is DENIED as MOOT;
Plaintiff Texas Capital Bank’s Motion No. 3 to Dismiss First Amended Counterclaims of
Bahman Hafezamini (Dkt. 47) is DENIED as MOOT;

2

Dallas Roadster, Ltd.’s Motion to Reconsider and Rescind Receivership Order (Dkt. 72) is
DENIED;
Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Dallas Roadster, Ltd.’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
(Dkt. 101) is DENIED; and
Plaintiff Texas Capital Bank’s Motion for Summary Judgment on All Claims and
Counterclaims (Dkt. 104) is GRANTED as to all claims except TCB’s breach of contract claim and
DR’s breach of contract counterclaim as to which the motion is DENIED.
Khobahy and Hafezamini shall take nothing by their counterclaims, and those claims are
dismissed with prejudice.

DR shall take nothing by its counterclaims of fraud, negligent

misrepresentation, wrongful receivership, and the claim seeking a declaration of common law
partnership or its equivalent and those claims are dismissed with prejudice.
As recommended by the Magistrate Judge, the only claims remaining are TCB’s breach of
contract claim against DR and DR’s breach of contract claim against TCB and any applicable claims
for attorney’s fees.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
.

SIGNED this the 30th day of March, 2015.

_______________________________
RICHARD A. SCHELL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3