Preview:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND JOHN E. STEIGERWALD, III and WORLDWIDE CHARTERS, LLC v. ALLEN W. BRADLEY, et al. : : : : Civil Action No. 99-2883 : : : : :

MEMORANDUM This dispute arises from a transaction in which plaintiffs John E. Steigerwald, III, and Worldwide Charters, LLC ("plaintiffs") contracted to purchase an aircraft from defendants Allen W. Bradley, Bradley Flying Services, Inc., and Gibraltar Aviation, Ltd. ("Bradley" and the "Bradley corporations"). Plaintiffs sued defendants Bradley and the Bradley corporations along with Summit Bank ("Summit"), which financed the purchase. On March 28, 2001, this court granted Summit's motion for summary judgment on plaintiffs' claims and on its own counterclaims. 136 F.Supp.2d 460 (D. Md. 2001). In a separate Memorandum and See

Order, this court entered an order of default judgment for plaintiffs as to liability against defendants Bradley corporations. See 2001 WL 357306 (D. Md. 2001). On January 28,

2002, upon receiving documentation of damages from the parties, this court entered an order awarding damages and legal fees to Summit as against plaintiffs. At the same time, this court

awarded damages in favor of plaintiffs against the Bradley

corporations for the diminished value of the aircraft and out-ofpocket expenses. This court ruled, however, that the plaintiffs

were not entitled to lost profits. Now pending are the following three motions: (1) plaintiffs' motion to reconsider the court's order denying them consequential damages; (2) plaintiffs' motions for judgment by default or summary judgment as against Bradley individually; and (3) Summit's motion for certification of final judgment. For the

reasons that follow, the court will grant plaintiffs' two motions, thereby completely resolving the case and rendering the third motion moot.

I.

Plaintiffs' Motion to Reconsider the Court's Order Denying Them Consequential Damages As stated, this court previously ruled that plaintiffs were

not entitled to lost profits.

On February 7, 2002, plaintiffs

moved this court pursuant to Local Rule 105.10 to reconsider that segment of the court's order denying them consequential damages. Plaintiffs seek damages in the amount of $963,282.56 for sixteen months of lost income. Damages at Ex. B.). The court considers that motion pursuant to Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. As the Fourth Circuit (Pls.' Aff. In Supp. of Pls.' Resultant

articulated in Small v. Hunt, 98 F.3d 789, 797 (4th Cir. 1996), "[a] court may grant relief under Rule 59(e) to `correct manifest 2

errors of... fact upon which the judgment is based'" (quoting 11 CHARLES ALAN WRIGHT, ARTHUR R. MILLER & MARY KAY KANE, FEDERAL PRACTICE PROCEDURE

Download John E. Steigerwald, III, et al. v. Allen W. Bradley, et al.pdf

Maryland Law