Streets v. Mangena
- Analisa Torres
- 1:23-cv-10648
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Streets v. Mangena, Magistrate Judge Aaron ordered papers for a proposed default-judgment motion, including proof of liability, damages, and jurisdiction.
The order affects Theodosia Billie Streets and the defaulting defendants, Daniel Mangena, also known as Lindani Mangena, and Dreamer HQ Inc., by setting requirements and deadlines for the proposed default-judgment process.
What happened
In Streets v. Mangena, Theodosia Billie Streets was directed to file a motion seeking a default judgment against Daniel Mangena, also known as Lindani Mangena, and Dreamer HQ Inc. The order did not grant that judgment.
The court required Streets to explain each legal claim and show how the allegations establish the defendants’ liability. She also must submit proposed findings about damages and other requested relief, state the exact amount of monetary relief sought, explain how the amount was calculated, and support the requested amount with affidavits and documents. She must also provide evidence establishing the court’s authority over the defendants and the case.
Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron set December 13, 2024, as the deadline for Streets’ submissions and service on the defendants. The defendants’ responses, if any, were due January 10, 2025. Judge Aaron also said the court may decide damages using written submissions alone, unless a party explains why a hearing is needed.
The detailed version
- Streets v. Mangena · No. 1:23-cv-10648
- Analisa Torres
- Nov. 12, 2024
Background
Theodosia Billie Streets anticipated filing an omnibus motion for default judgment against Daniel Mangena, also known as Lindani Mangena, and Dreamer HQ Inc. The matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron.
Order
The court ordered Streets to file her motion for default judgment by December 13, 2024. The motion must identify the elements of each asserted cause of action and explain how Streets’s allegations establish the defendants’ liability for each claim. The order noted that a defendant’s default concedes the complaint’s factual allegations, but the plaintiff still must show that those allegations establish liability on each claim.
Streets also must file proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law addressing all damages and other relief sought. The filing must include a final paragraph stating the exact dollar amount or other monetary relief requested. The proposed findings must connect the damages amount to the claims on which liability has been established, explain how Streets calculated the amount, and be supported by affidavits and documentary evidence. Each proposed factual finding must be followed by citations to the supporting affidavit paragraphs or documentary pages. Streets may submit a legal memorandum instead of conclusions of law to explain the legal principles governing the damages claims.
The papers must include an affidavit from a person with personal knowledge establishing that the court has personal jurisdiction over the defaulting defendants and subject-matter jurisdiction over the case. The court notified the parties that it may conduct the damages inquiry based only on written submissions. A party requesting an evidentiary hearing must explain why written submissions are insufficient and identify the witnesses and evidence that would be presented.
Deadlines and Disposition
By December 13, 2024, Streets was required to serve the motion papers and a copy of the order on the defaulting defendants and file proof of service. The defendants’ responses, if any, were due to Streets’s counsel and the court by January 10, 2025. The order set requirements and deadlines for pursuing default judgment; it did not itself enter default judgment or determine damages.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.