Thani A.T. Al Thani v. Hanke

Background

On September 23, 2024, the court partially granted Al Thani’s and Stevens’s motions for summary judgment, which is a ruling based on undisputed facts that resolves claims without a trial. The court previously found liability on certain claims but did not decide all damages. For Stevens, the earlier ruling granted summary judgment on liability for his breach-of-contract claim against IOLO Global LLC and Alan J. Hanke, with Hanke treated as IOLO’s alter ego, meaning the court treated him as responsible under the circumstances described in the earlier ruling. The court did not previously decide the amount of damages Stevens could recover.

The court had also previously ordered Hanke and IOLO, together, to pay Al Thani reasonable incremental attorneys’ fees and costs caused by their failure to comply with discovery orders during specified periods in 2020 and 2021.

Stevens’s Motion for Reconsideration

Stevens asked the court to reconsider its refusal to decide damages arising specifically from Section 5.3 of the Management and Deposit Agreement. That provision stated that, if IOLO did not perform, Stevens could request the return of his original assets and IOLO had to comply. The court had already determined that IOLO failed to perform its obligations and that it breached Section 5.3 by failing to return Stevens’s $1 million after he demanded it.

Applying Wyoming contract law, the court held that Stevens was entitled to $1 million because that amount would put him in the position he would have occupied if IOLO had performed the agreement. The court found that Stevens proved this damage amount with reasonable certainty. It granted Stevens summary judgment against IOLO and against Hanke as IOLO’s alter ego for the Section 5.3 breach.

The court awarded Stevens $1 million in damages, plus prejudgment interest at seven percent from July 16, 2020, through the date of the opinion and order. Post-judgment interest was to accrue at the statutory rate under 28 U.S.C. § 1961 from the date judgment is entered until payment in full. The court did not decide on summary judgment the damages allegedly arising from other contractual provisions.

Joint Motion for Reconsideration

Al Thani and Stevens jointly asked the court to reconsider its refusal to grant summary judgment for the full payment schedules described in Appendix B of their agreements. They argued that the agreements required those payments and that the court had misread language referring to “desired funding.” They also argued that provisions allowing them to request the return of their original investments applied only to failures involving surety bonds.

The court denied the joint motion. It concluded that “desired funding” reasonably described an intended or hoped-for result rather than a guaranteed payment schedule. It also concluded that the provisions allowing the plaintiffs to request the return of their original assets applied broadly to “any non-performance by IOLO” and were not limited to failures involving surety bonds. The plaintiffs therefore did not identify controlling law, material facts, or overlooked contract language that justified reconsideration. The court left unresolved the plaintiffs’ requests for larger expectation or lost-profits damages.

Attorneys’ Fees and Costs

Al Thani requested $132,232.50 in attorneys’ fees and costs related to the Hanke Defendants’ discovery violations. The court found that the work claimed was generally compensable but reduced the requested hourly rates by 20 percent. It did so because the supporting evidence was limited, the requested rates were high compared with comparable rates in the district, and the underlying discovery dispute was relatively straightforward. The court also considered that the Hanke Defendants had not provided evidence of their financial circumstances supporting a further reduction.

The court separately reduced the reasonable hours by 15 percent because many billing entries combined compensable and noncompensable tasks, making the request harder to review. After applying those reductions, the court awarded Al Thani $101,184.68 in attorneys’ fees and costs.

Disposition

Judge John P. Cronan granted Stevens’s motion for reconsideration, denied the joint motion for reconsideration, awarded Al Thani $101,184.68 in attorneys’ fees and costs, and granted summary judgment to Stevens for $1 million plus prejudgment interest on the portion of his breach-of-contract claim involving Section 5.3. The clerk was directed to enter partial judgment, and the parties were ordered to appear for a status conference concerning the next steps in the litigation.