NEW ORLEANS -- Judge Jay Zainey has issued multiple pre-trial rulings in W. Christopher Beary’s lawsuit against David W. Deese and a group collectively referred to as the Quinco companies. The case centers on a business dispute.
The lawsuit was put before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Beary’s motion to dismiss a countersuit filed by the defendants was approved. The defendants, meanwhile, filed two separate motions for partial summary judgment. The court granted one of the motions while the second was approved in part.
The defendants' request to disqualify one of the lawyers working for the plaintiff was also granted. Zainey issued the ruling on July 12.
Beary and the defendants were in negotiations for the sale of the various Quinco companies. Deese is the president and sole shareholder of Quinco Electrical Inc., Quinco Electrical of Dallas Inc., Quinco Electrical of Georgia Inc., Quinco Electrical of North Carolina Inc., and Quinco Services Inc.
Beary alleges the defendants committed a breach of contract by refusing to honor due diligence requests. Beary also accuses the defendants of fraud and failure to negotiate in good faith.
Both the plaintiff and the defendants agree that on June 2, 2016, Deese signed a letter of intent (LOI) discussing the terms of the potential sale of the Quinco companies. The defendants allege that subsequent conversations are irrelevant. The only real agreement between the parties, they contend, is the June 2016 LOI.
Beary disagrees. On July 18, 2016, he emailed Deese about a potential funding problem. The emails continued for a few weeks.
“Thereafter, from around July 26, 2016 to Aug. 12, 2016, the parties continued negotiations, but were unable to agree on final terms,” Zainey wrote in her ruling. “Plaintiff maintains that Deese would orally agree to new terms then refuse to sign any amended LOI evidencing the new terms... On the other hand, defendants maintain that these proposed amendments were not executed by Deese or Deese’s counsel and therefore expired on their own terms.”
Zainey’s ruling was multi-pronged. The defendants’ countersuit was dismissed because their argument was deemed to be weak. They had more success with their motions for partial summary judgment. One request centered on the breach of conflict accusation. Zainey granted part of the motion and denied the rest, arguing that Beary's claim depended on multiple factors. Only one of those factors was deemed insufficient.
The second motion for partial judgment involved accusations of fraud. The court sided with the defendants and dismissed Beary’s claim.
The suit is now headed to trial.