Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

T.W.T. Distributing, Inc. v. Johnson Prods. Co., Inc.

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina

June 4, 2013

T.W.T. DISTRIBUTING, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
JOHNSON PRODUCTS COMPANY, INC., Defendant

Page 577

For T.W.T. Distributing, Inc., Plaintiff: Kerry Link Traynum, LEAD ATTORNEY, Johnston, Allison & Hord, P.A., Charlotte, NC; Kimberly Jill Brow, LEAD ATTORNEY, Johnston Allison & Hord, Charlotte, NC.

For Johnson Products Company Inc., Defendant: Jessica Floyd Middlebrooks, LEAD ATTORNEY, Smith, Anderson, Blount, Dorsett, Mitchell & Jernigan, L.L.P, Raleigh, NC; Clifton Lennis Brinson, Smith, Anderson, Blount, Raleigh, NC.

OPINION

Page 578

MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

David S. Cayer, United States Magistrate Judge.

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant's " Motion to Dismiss" (document #7); as well as the parties' briefs and exhibits. See documents ##8, 9 and 11.

This matter has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and this Motion is now ripe for the Court's consideration.

Having fully considered the arguments, the record, and the applicable authority, the undersigned respectfully recommends

Page 579

that the Motion to Dismiss be granted as to Plaintiff's claim for promissory estoppel and denied in all other respects, as discussed below.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Accepting the factual allegations of the Complaint as true, Plaintiff is a North Carolina corporation with its principal place of business in Charlotte, North Carolina. Defendant is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Dallas, Texas.

Plaintiff is a distributor of hair care products. Defendant manufactures hair care products. In September 2009, Plaintiff and Defendant negotiated a contract for Plaintiff to act as Defendant's " warehousing and transportation management services agent." During the course of those negotiations, Plaintiff determined it needed 18,000 additional square feet of warehouse space to accommodate Defendant's products. Plaintiff investigated available ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.