Townsquare Media, Inc. v. Regency Furniture, Inc.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

TOWNSQUARE MEDIA, INC.,

Plaintiff, No. 21-CV-4695 (KMK) v. ORDER REGENCY FURNITURE, INC. and REGENCY MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC.,

Defendants.

KENNETH M. KARAS, United States District Judge: On June 3, 2025, the Court conducted a bench trial in the above captioned case. At trial, Defendant argued that the evidence in the record suggested that Townsquare IGNITE, rather than Plaintiff, Townsquare Media, Inc., was the appropriate party to the disputed digital contracts. Plaintiff is directed to respond to this argument, providing any case law or evidence from the record that it believes substantiates its allegation that Townsquare Media, Inc. in fact entered the contracts at issue. Plaintiff may, for example, identify the individuals who were parties to the email exchange that the Court previously concluded formed the basis of the contracts. See Townsquare Media, Inc. v. Regency Furniture, Inc., No. 21-CV-4695, 2022 WL 4538954, at *11–12 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 28, 2022); Townsquare Media, Inc. v. Regency Furniture, Inc., No. 21- CV-4695, 2023 WL 6289984, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 27, 2023). Plaintiffs have until June 11, 2025, to provide the Court with briefing on this matter. Defendant’s response is due no later than June 18, 2025. Plaintiff’s reply is due no later than June 25, 2025. SO ORDERED. Dated: June 4, 2025 White Plains, New York eg rae at Dat deol

-KENNETHM. KARAS ss United States District Judge