Sectek, Incorporated v. Diamond

Filing 123

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying Pltff SecTek's 70 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, denying Deft Diamond's 100 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, and denying as moot Diamond's 85 Motion to Strike Alleged Facts and Evidence Supporting Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. /s/ by District Judge Gerald Bruce Lee on 8/19/16. (tbul, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
ALEXANDRIA DIVISION

SECTEK, INC.

)

Plaintiff,

)
)

y

) CaseNo. l;15-cv-01631-GBL
)

JEANETTE S. DIAMOND,

)
)
)

Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff SecTek's Motion for Partial Summary

Judgment (Doc. 70), Defendant Jeannette Diamond's Motion to Strike Alleged Facts and
Evidence Supporting Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 85), and Defendant
Jeannette Diamond's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 100). This case arises from

SecTek's purchase of The Diamond Group ("TDG") from Defendant Jeanette S. Diamond,

pursuant to a Stock Purchase Agreement ("SPA"). (Doc. 71 at 1). SecTek seeks indemnification
for a New Mexico Tax Assessment. (Doc. 71 at 1). The assessment allegedly resulted from a
TDG office in New Mexico that Diamond allegedly concealed from both the state of New

Mexico and SecTek before she sold TDG. (Doc. 71 at 1-2). There are two issues before the
Court.

The first issue is whether summary judgment is appropriate even though discovery had
not concluded at the time SecTek moved for summary judgment. The Court DENIES SecTek's

Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 70) for because SecTek moved for summary

judgment while discovery was still open, forcing Diamond to oppose the motion on an
incomplete record.
1