TENTATIVE RULING: grant in part and deny in part
BACKGROUND
This is a breach of contract and commercial tort action.
Essentially, Plaintiff Atiz Innovation Company Limited (“Plaintiff”) alleges that it agreed to sell manufactured products to Defendants Nicholas Warnock (“Warnock”) and Atiz Innovation, Inc. (“Atiz”) (collectively “Defendants”) from approximately 2006 to 2018. Warnock is Atiz’s owner. Defendants received “distributor pricing” on Plaintiff’s products and then made money selling the products at higher prices to third parties. Plaintiff shipped the products to Defendants and sometimes to Defendants’ customers when requested. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants did not pay all the money owed to Plaintiff. Plaintiff commenced this action to collect on the purchase agreements and invoices issued from August 31, 2015 to January 5, 2018.
On February 18 and 19, 2020, Defendants filed multiple motions to quash and/or modify subpoenas.
On February 26, 2020, Plaintiff opposed.
D
Hearing Date
March 10, 2020
Type
Other Breach of Contract/Warranty (not fraud or negligence) (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
TENTATIVE RULING: grant in part and deny in part
BACKGROUND
This is a breach of contract and commercial tort action.
Essentially, Plaintiff Atiz Innovation Company Limited (“Plaintiff”) alleges that it agreed to sell manufactured products to Defendants Nicholas Warnock (“Warnock”) and Atiz Innovation, Inc. (“Atiz”) (collectively “Defendants”) from approximately 2006 to 2018. Warnock is Atiz’s owner. Defendants received “distributor pricing” on Plaintiff’s products and then made money selling the products at higher prices to third parties. Plaintiff shipped the products to Defendants and sometimes to Defendants’ customers when requested. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants did not pay all the money owed to Plaintiff. Plaintiff commenced this action to collect on the purchase agreements and invoices issued from August 31, 2015 to January 5, 2018.
On February 18 and 19, 2020, Defendants filed multiple motions to quash and/or modify subpoenas.
On February 26, 2020, Plaintiff opposed.
D