On March 01, 2024 a
Exhibit,Appendix
was filed
involving a dispute between
Staccato Brands Llc,
and
Qardio Inc.,
for PL - Civil Plenary
in the District Court of Hamilton County.
Preview
29D03-2403-PL-002294 Filed: 3/1/2024 12:38 PM
Clerk
Hamilton Superior Court 3 Hamilton County, Indiana
STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE HAMILTON COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
) SS:
COUNTY OF HAMILTON ) CAUSE NO.: 29D03-2402-PL-
STACCATO BRANDS LLC )
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
QARDIO INC. )
Defendant. )
COMPLAINT
Comes now Plaintiff, Staccato Brands LLC. (“Staccato”), by counsel, and for its Complaint
for against Defendant Qardio Inc. (“Qardio”) states as follows:
JURISDICTION
1. Staccato is an Indiana limited liability company with its principal place of business in
Hamilton County, Indiana.
2. Upon information and belief, Qardio is a for-profit Delaware corporation registered to do
business in California with its principal place of business in California.
3. Staccato, while situated here in Indiana, performed services for Qardio in December 2023 for
which Qardio has failed to pay.
4. Personal jurisdiction and venue in this Court are appropriate as Staccato’s work was
performed primarily from Hamilton County, Indiana and its primary place of business is
Hamilton County, Indiana.
FACTS
5. Staccato was hired as an independent contractor to provide marketing and related services to
Qardio in August 2022.
6. The initial independent contractor agreement was to last for 2 months at the rate of $12,000
per month.
7. Qardio renewed the agreement with Staccato on a month-to-month basis thereafter at the same
rate of $12,000 per month through June 2023. Starting in July 2023 the agreement was
renewed on a month-to-month basis at a rate of $14,000 per month.
8. Qardio has paid Staccato for each month for services provided by Staccato except December
2023.
9. Staccato submitted its invoice for December 2023 services to Qardio on or about January 3,
2024.
10. Qardio approved the invoice on or about January 5, 2024.
11. As of the date of this Complaint, Staccato has not been paid.
Count I: Breach of Contract
12. Staccato incorporates, by this reference, the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 11
above as if fully set forth herein.
13. Qardio agreed to pay Staccato $14,000 for services provided by Staccato for the month of
December 2023.
14. Qardio has failed to pay any portion of the $14,000 to Staccato.
15. Qardio has breached its agreement with Staccato.
16. Staccato is entitled to payment for the services it provided to Qardio.
Count II: Unjust Enrichment
17. Staccato incorporates, by this reference, the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 16
above as if fully set forth herein.
18. Qardio received $14,000 in services for the month of December 2023 from Staccato’s work.
19. Qardio has paid nothing toward the work performed by Staccato in December 2023.
20. Qardio has been unjustly enriched by $14,000.
21. Staccato is entitled to compensation for the value that they have given to Qardio for work
performed in December 2023.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Staccato Brands LLC, prays that this Court enter judgment in
Plaintiff’s favor and against Defendant, Qardio Inc. including interest on the judgment at the
statutory rate of 8% per annum and for all other relief as is just and proper in the premises.
Respectfully Submitted,
WEBSTER & GARINO LLC
/s/ Danica L. Eyler
Danica L .Eyler, Atty No. 24869-49
Attorney for Plaintiff
WEBSTER & GARINO LLC
209 E. 175th Street, Suite A
Westfield, Indiana 46074
P: (317) 565-1818
F: (317) 565-1835
deyler@websterlegal.com
Document Filed Date
March 01, 2024
Case Filing Date
March 01, 2024
Category
PL - Civil Plenary
Status
03/01/2024 , Pending (active)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
29D03-2403-PL-002294 Filed: 3/1/2024 12:38 PM Clerk Hamilton Superior Court 3 Hamilton County, Indiana STATE OF INDIANA ) IN THE HAMILTON COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT ) SS: COUNTY OF HAMILTON ) CAUSE NO.: 29D03-2402-PL- STACCATO BRANDS LLC ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) QARDIO INC. ) Defendant. ) COMPLAINT Comes now Plaintiff, Staccato Brands LLC. (“Staccato”), by counsel, and for its Complaint for against Defendant Qardio Inc. (“Qardio”) states as follows: JURISDICTION 1. Staccato is an Indiana limited liability company with its principal place of business in Hamilton County, Indiana. 2. Upon information and belief, Qardio is a for-profit Delaware corporation registered to do business in California with its principal place of business in California. 3. Staccato, while situated here in Indiana, performed services for Qardio in December 2023 for which Qardio has failed to pay. 4. Personal jurisdiction and venue in this Court are appropriate as Staccato’s work was performed primarily from Hamilton County, Indiana and its primary place of business is Hamilton County, Indiana. FACTS 5. Staccato was hired as an independent contractor to provide marketing and related services to Qardio in August 2022. 6. The initial independent contractor agreement was to last for 2 months at the rate of $12,000 per month. 7. Qardio renewed the agreement with Staccato on a month-to-month basis thereafter at the same rate of $12,000 per month through June 2023. Starting in July 2023 the agreement was renewed on a month-to-month basis at a rate of $14,000 per month. 8. Qardio has paid Staccato for each month for services provided by Staccato except December 2023. 9. Staccato submitted its invoice for December 2023 services to Qardio on or about January 3, 2024. 10. Qardio approved the invoice on or about January 5, 2024. 11. As of the date of this Complaint, Staccato has not been paid. Count I: Breach of Contract 12. Staccato incorporates, by this reference, the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 11 above as if fully set forth herein. 13. Qardio agreed to pay Staccato $14,000 for services provided by Staccato for the month of December 2023. 14. Qardio has failed to pay any portion of the $14,000 to Staccato. 15. Qardio has breached its agreement with Staccato. 16. Staccato is entitled to payment for the services it provided to Qardio. Count II: Unjust Enrichment 17. Staccato incorporates, by this reference, the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 16 above as if fully set forth herein. 18. Qardio received $14,000 in services for the month of December 2023 from Staccato’s work. 19. Qardio has paid nothing toward the work performed by Staccato in December 2023. 20. Qardio has been unjustly enriched by $14,000. 21. Staccato is entitled to compensation for the value that they have given to Qardio for work performed in December 2023. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Staccato Brands LLC, prays that this Court enter judgment in Plaintiff’s favor and against Defendant, Qardio Inc. including interest on the judgment at the statutory rate of 8% per annum and for all other relief as is just and proper in the premises. Respectfully Submitted, WEBSTER & GARINO LLC /s/ Danica L. Eyler Danica L .Eyler, Atty No. 24869-49 Attorney for Plaintiff WEBSTER & GARINO LLC 209 E. 175th Street, Suite A Westfield, Indiana 46074 P: (317) 565-1818 F: (317) 565-1835 deyler@websterlegal.com