Summary
finding that the plaintiff established a legitimate business expectancy in an operations and maintenance contract with a government agency based in part on evidence that the plaintiff "had a prior relationship with [the agency] doing the work at issue in the buildings at issue"
Summary of this case from Legal Tech. Grp., Inc. v. MukerjiOpinion
Civil Action No. 03-1810 (CKK).
January 4, 2006
ORDER
For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is, this 4th day of January, 2006, hereby
ORDERED that [34] Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED; it is further
ORDERED that [38] Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED; it is further
ORDERED that Defendants are to provide the Court with a complete copy of Mr. Wilber G. Van Scoik's deposition testimony by Wednesday, January 11, 2006, so that the Court may address the one issue on which the Court's ruling has reserved — i.e., the adequacy of Mr. Van Scoik's expert report.
SO ORDERED.