Quantcast

Green Energy Associates alleges it is owed more than $700,000 under agreement

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RECORD

Sunday, November 24, 2024

Green Energy Associates alleges it is owed more than $700,000 under agreement

Lawsuits
Money

FRESNO – A Michigan company alleges that a California individual and a Wyoming company failed to pay an agreed-upon sum in a settlement.

Plaintiff Green Energy Associates LLC is suing over allegations of breach of contract. The company alleges that Ray Brewer and CH4 Power Inc. failed to make agreed-upon payments. The complaint was filed on Sept. 20 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California.  

In November 2016, the suit states Green Energy entered into a deal with Brewer and CH4, a sole proprietorship operated by Brewer. Green Energy advanced $780,000 to defendants, and the suit states the partnership quickly fell apart. According to the suit, the defendants agreed to pay $830,000 to settle the dispute. The money was to be paid by Feb. 14, 2017.  

According to Green Energy, the defendants made a single $100,000 payment. The complaint notes that the defendants “have failed and refused, and continue to fail and refuse to pay the remaining balance due under the agreement.”  

Plaintiff is seeking a jury trial and is asking for damages, attorney’s fees, and “such other and further relief as the court deems just and proper,” the suit states.  

The complaint includes a copy of the disputed agreement. Brewer and CH4 both signed the deal. The agreement asks defendants to pay the requested sum with 90 days of the signing.  

Plaintiff claims that Defendants breached the terms of their agreement by neglecting to make the stipulated payments. According to plaintiff, it has been “damaged in the principal sum of $730,682.19, together with an interest rate of 10 percent per annum from Feb. 17, 2017.”  

Plaintiff explains that the court has jurisdiction in the suit because “Plaintiff is diverse from defendants, specifically, plaintiff, on the one hand, is a resident of the state of Michigan and none of the members of plaintiff are residents of California and/or Wyoming, while on the other hand defendants are residents of California or Wyoming...”.

More News