Gucci America, Inc v. Lord & Taylor Ecomm LLC
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:23-cv-10239
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Gucci America v. Lord & Taylor Ecomm, Judge Tarnofsky ordered written submissions for a damages inquest after Lord & Taylor’s default.
Gucci America must submit evidence and proposed findings by September 6, 2024, serve Lord & Taylor, and prove jurisdiction, service, liability, and any requested fees. Lord & Taylor may respond by September 30, 2024. The order does not yet award damages or other relief.
What happened
In Gucci America, Inc. v. Lord & Taylor Ecomm LLC, Lord & Taylor had defaulted, and Judge Lorna G. Schofield referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky to determine appropriate damages.
The order requires Gucci to file proposed findings, evidence supporting its damages request, information establishing the court’s authority over the parties and the case, proof that Lord & Taylor is liable, and any materials supporting attorneys’ fees by September 6, 2024. Gucci must also mail those materials to Lord & Taylor. Lord & Taylor may respond by September 30, 2024.
Judge Tarnofsky ordered the parties to explain any request for a live damages hearing and stated that the court may conduct the inquest using written submissions alone. The order did not set a damages amount or enter a damages judgment.
The detailed version
- Gucci America, Inc v. Lord & Taylor Ecomm LLC · No. 1:23-cv-10239
- Lorna Schofield
- Aug. 23, 2024
Background
Lord & Taylor Ecomm LLC had defaulted in Gucci America, Inc.’s action. By referral from Judge Lorna G. Schofield, Magistrate Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky issued this order setting the procedure for an inquest, which is a court process for determining the amount of damages and other relief after a defendant’s default.
Required submissions
By September 6, 2024, Gucci must file proposed findings of fact and legal conclusions identifying all damages and other monetary relief sought, along with the precise amount requested and any requested non-monetary relief. If Gucci seeks actual damages, it must support its request with admissible evidence, such as declarations or affidavits authenticating necessary documents. Each proposed factual finding must cite the supporting declaration or documentary evidence, and Gucci must explain how it calculated the requested damages and connect them to its legal claims against Lord & Taylor.
Gucci must also provide information allowing the court to determine whether it has authority over the defendants and the case. The order emphasizes that proper service and both personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction must be established before a damages judgment can be entered. The order warns that inadequate proof of service could lead to denial of Gucci’s request for a damages judgment. Gucci must further show, by reference to specific allegations in the complaint, that those allegations establish Lord & Taylor’s liability for each claim despite the default. Any request for attorneys’ fees must include authenticated contemporaneous time records, information about each timekeeper’s qualifications, and evidence of costs and expenses.
Service, response, and hearing
Before filing, Gucci must mail Lord & Taylor the proposed findings, supporting materials, and this order, then file proof of mailing. Lord & Taylor may serve and file responses by September 30, 2024. Judge Tarnofsky stated that the court may decide the inquest based solely on written submissions. A party seeking an evidentiary hearing must explain why written submissions are insufficient and identify the witnesses and evidence it would present.
Disposition
This order establishes the next steps for determining whether Gucci can obtain a damages judgment and, if so, the amount and other relief. It does not determine liability, award damages, set attorneys’ fees, or enter a final damages judgment.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.