McEnery

McEnery v. McEnery

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 28, 20254:21-cv-09614California3,069 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 JOHN P. MCENERY, Case No. 21-cv-09614-HSG

8 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD

9 v. Re: Dkt. No. 62 10 TOM MCENERY, et al., 11 Defendants.

12 13 Pending before the Court is the motion to confirm arbitration award filed by Defendants 14 Tom McEnery, Martin Menne, and MCM Diversified. Dkt. No. 62. The Court finds this matter 15 appropriate for disposition without oral argument and the matter is deemed submitted. See Civil 16 L.R. 7-1(b). For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS the motion to confirm the 17 arbitration award. 18 I. BACKGROUND 19 The parties are familiar with the lengthy history of this case, and the Court only includes 20 those details that are relevant to the pending motion. 21 Plaintiff John McEnery and Defendants hold ownership interests in Urban Markets, LLC 22 (“UM”) and Urban Markets Entertainment, LLC (“UME”) (collectively, “the LLCs”).1 See Dkt. 23 No. 62-11, Ex. 12 (“Corrected Final Award”) at…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.