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.

Bio-Behavioral Care Solutions, Inc. v. Doctors Behavioral Hospital, LLC

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

October 27, 2016

BIO-BEHAVIORAL CARE SOLUTIONS, INC., A Michigan limited liability company, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant,
v.
DOCTORS BEHAVIORAL HOSPITAL, LLC., d/b/a Doctors Neuropsychiatric Hospital, an Indiana limited liability company, Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF/COUNTER-DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL (DOC. 39) [[1]]

          AVERN COHN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         I.

         This is a contract case. Plaintiff Bio-Behavioral Care Solutions, LLC is suing defendant Doctors Behavioral Hospital, LLC claiming that defendant breached a contract (Marketing Agreement) between the parties, it seeks $195, 000 in damages.[2] In broad terms, plaintiff performs marketing services for hospitals which it says results in hospitals obtaining business relationships with long term care facilities that use the services offered by the hospitals. Defendant, a hospital in Indiana, was interested in building relationships with nursing homes and assisted care facilities in Western Michigan. In 2012, defendant and plaintiff entered into a Marketing Agreement in which plaintiff agreed to provide management and consulting services to defendant.

         Plaintiff says that it provided services under the Marketing Agreement and defendant has refused to pay. The complaint (Doc. 1) is in four counts:

Count I - Account Stated
Count II - Breach of Contract
Count III - Unjust Enrichment/Quantum Meruit
Count IV - Promissory Estoppel

         Defendant filed a one count counterclaim, stating that plaintiff breached the Marketing Agreement by failing to fulfill its obligations. (Doc. 3). Both sides seek money damages.

         Before the Court is plaintiff's motion to compel. For the reasons that follow, the motion will be granted and plaintiff will be awarded its attorney fees and expenses associated with the motion.

         II.

         A.

         Shortly after the complaint was filed, plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment (Doc. 12) claiming that there is no genuine issue of material fact that defendant has breached the Marketing Agreement.

         Thereafter, defendant filed a motion to strike portions of the affidavit testimony of two individuals or to compel answers to deposition questions (Doc. 32).

         After briefing on the motion, plaintiff filed the instant motion to compel, contending that discovery requests sent to defendant after it filed its motion for summary judgment are relevant to its claims for liability and damages. (Doc. 39).[3]

         In light of the fact that discovery was not complete, the Court denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and defendant's motion to strike without prejudice. The Court also observed that based on the summary judgment papers, there appeared to be factual disputes. (Doc. 40).

         B.

         Plaintiff's case is supported in part on a document obtained during discovery from defendant entitled “Doctors Behavioral Hospital, LLC A/P Aging Detail.” A/P is presumed to mean “account payable.” This document appears to ...


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.