Texcell Inc. v. STS Hydropower LTD.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 TEXCELL INC., et al., No. 2:18-cv-01621-KJM-DMC Plaintiffs, v. ORDER STS HYDROPOWER LTD., et al., Defendants.

17 In this contract dispute between plaintiffs Texcell Inc. and Arnold Leong and defendants STS Hydropower Ltd., STS Hydropower, LLC and Eagle Creek Renewable Energy, LLC, defendants move for summary judgment of all of plaintiffs’ claims. For the reasons below, the motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. I. BACKGROUND The following facts are undisputed except where noted. On February 22, 1988, defendant STS Hydropower Ltd. entered into a thirty-year lease agreement (“Lease”) with Richard D. Spight to lease certain real property in Butte County for the purpose of installing and operating a hydroelectric system on that property. Statement of Undisputed Facts (SUF) 2–4, ECF No. 48-2. Thereafter, STS Hydropower Ltd. constructed a hydroelectric facility on the property, called the…