United States District Court, D. Minnesota
Allen Beaulieu, individually and d/b/a Allen Beaulieu Photography, Plaintiff,
Clint Stockwell, an individual; Studio 1124, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company; Thomas Martin Crouse, an individual; Charles Willard “Chuck” Sanvik, an individual, and Does 3 through 7, Defendants.
Russell M. Spence, Jr., Esq., Parker Daniels Kibort LLC,
counsel for Plaintiff.
Michael L. Puklich, Esq., Neaton & Puklich, P.L.L.P.,
counsel for Defendants Clint Stockwell and Studio 1124, LLC.
F. Fox, Esq., Lauren Shoeberl, Esq., and Lewis A. Remele,
Jr., Esq., Bassford Remele, counsel for Defendant Charles
Wood, Esq., Outfront MN, counsel for Defendant Thomas Martin
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
DONOVAN W. FRANK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Court granted summary judgment in favor of Defendants Clint
Stockwell (“Stockwell”) and Charles Willard
Sanvik (“Sanvik”) on December 7, 2018. (Doc. Nos.
220, 221.) The Court now addresses the remaining issues in
the case, including the status of Defendants Thomas Martin
Crouse (“Crouse”) and Studio 1124, LLC
(“Studio 1124”), Plaintiff's state-law
claims, and Defendants' counterclaims.
factual background for the above-entitled matter is clearly
set forth in the Court's Memorandum Opinion and Order
granting summary judgment in favor of Stockwell and is
incorporated by reference here. (See Doc. No. 221
(“Stockwell Judgment”).) The Court notes
particular facts relevant to this Order below.
Defendants Crouse and Studio 1124
Allen Beaulieu individually and d/b/a Allen Beaulieu
Photography (“Beaulieu”) alleges that Crouse
conspired to deprive Beaulieu of his original photographs and
to use the stolen photographs to Beaulieu's detriment.
Beaulieu brings four claims against Crouse: (1) conversion
(Count Four); (2) unjust enrichment (Count Five); (3)
tortious interference with prospective advantage (Count
Seven); and (4) injunctive relief (Count Two). (See
Doc. No. 47 (“Am. Compl.”).)
1124 is a single member limited liability company, solely
owned by Stockwell. (Am. Compl. ¶ 6.) Beaulieu brings
eight claims against Studio 1124, the same claims he brought
against Stockwell: (1) copyright infringement; (2) injunctive
relief; (3) willful statutory infringement; (4) conversion;
(5) unjust enrichment; (6) fraud; (7) tortious interference
with prospective advantage; and (8) violation of
Minnesota's Vulnerable Adult Act.
Plaintiff's State-Law Claims
Court has original jurisdiction over this action because
Count One, copyright infringement, arises under federal law
pursuant to U.S.C. 17 §§ 101, et. seq. 28
U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1338(a). This Court has
supplemental jurisdiction over Beaulieu's state-law
claims (Counts Two-Eight) because they are so related to his
federal claim that they form part of the ...