Opinion
3:21-CV-74-DCP
04-18-2022
TWIN K CONSTRUCTION, INC., Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, v. UMA GEOTECHNICAL CONSTRUCTION, INC., Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff, and CLAY BRIGHT, COMMISSIONER OF THE TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Nominal Defendant.
FINAL JUDGMENT
DEBRA C. POPLIN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This case is before the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), Rule 73(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the consent of the parties, for all further proceedings, including entry of judgment [Doc. 20].
For the reasons provided in the Court's Memorandum Opinion [Doc. 96], the Court enters JUDGMENT IN FAVOR of UMA Geotechnical Construction, Inc., (“UMA”) on its claim pursuant to the Tennessee Prompt Pay Act in the amount of $210, 900.00.
The Court arrives at this calculation as follows: 703 days x $300 = $210, 900.00. See Tenn. Code § 66-34-104(c).
For the reasons provided in the Court's Memorandum Opinion, [Doc. 97], the Court enters JUDGMENT IN FAVOR of Twin K Construction, Inc., (“Twin K”) on UMA's claims of breach of good faith and fair dealing (Count II), unjust enrichment (Count III), and the request for injunctive relief. The Court further finds Twin K's motion for directed verdict for bad faith under the Tennessee Prompt Pay Act (Count IV) is DENIED AS MOOT as UMA conceded that it is not entitled its attorney's fees in this matter and the question of bad faith is no longer relevant.
IT IS SO ORDERED.