Summit Investments II v. Sam's East, Inc., 3:23-cv-00479

This case involves a lease dispute over a warehouse in Prince George, Virginia, owned by Summit Investments II and V ("Summit") and leased to Sam’s East, Inc. ("Sam’s East").
After leasing the premises in July 2022, Sam’s East hired TRW Enterprises to perform floor joint work for over $100,000 without notifying or obtaining written consent from Summit, as required by the lease.
The floor work resulted in cracks, which led to further attempts at repairs by Sam’s East, but Summit deemed these efforts insufficient.
Summit sued Sam’s East for breach of contract for proceeding with repairs without consent and for causing floor damage; Sam’s East filed counterclaims, alleging Summit’s faulty original construction caused the floor issues.
The present opinion addresses Summit’s partial motion to dismiss the portion of Sam’s East’s counterclaim seeking attorneys’ fees from Summit under the lease’s indemnification provision (§ 23).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Section 23 of the lease allows Sam’s East to recover attorneys’ fees from Summit for litigation between them	§23 only applies to litigation with third parties, not between Summit and Sam’s East	Payments to third-party contractors (like TRW and Ace Avant) constitute claims covered by §23, so indemnification applies	Court agrees with Summit: §23 does not cover attorneys’ fees for disputes between the contracting parties

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (plausibility standard for a claim’s sufficiency under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6))
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (describes pleading standard and requirement of factual allegations above a speculative level)
Seaboard Air Line R.R. Co. v. Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike Auth., 121 S.E.2d 499 (Va. 1961) (indemnity agreements are interpreted using general contract principles)