Brathwaite v. Martini Collections Inc.
- Ho
- 1:22-cv-04929
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Brathwaite v. Martini Collections, Judge Ho adopted a recommendation for default judgment awarding wages, damages, fees, costs, and interest.
Rudelle Brathwaite and the defendant in the labor matter, identified in the caption as Martini Collections Inc. et al.
What happened
In Brathwaite v. Martini Collections Inc., the court reviewed a magistrate judge’s recommendation following an inquiry into damages in this labor case. The recommendation advised entering default judgment against the defendant and awarding Rudelle Brathwaite unpaid wages, an equal amount in liquidated damages, attorney’s fees, costs, and interest.
The defendant did not file objections or ask for more time to do so. The court therefore found that the defendant had given up the right to object to the recommendation or seek appellate review of it.
Judge Ho reviewed the recommendation and found it well reasoned and supported by the facts and law. He adopted it in its entirety, including the recommended awards of $14,607.27 in unpaid wages, $14,607.27 in liquidated damages, $41,525.50 in attorney’s fees, $1,482 in costs, and interest of $3.60 per day from July 9, 2017, until judgment is entered.
The detailed version
- Brathwaite v. Martini Collections Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-04929
- Ho
- Feb. 10, 2025
Background
This labor matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Gorenstein for an inquiry into damages. On January 14, 2025, Magistrate Judge Gorenstein filed an amended Report and Recommendation recommending that default judgment be entered against the defendant. A default judgment is a judgment entered when a party fails to defend the case.
The recommendation proposed awarding Rudelle Brathwaite:
- $14,607.27 for unpaid wages; - $14,607.27 in liquidated damages; - $41,525.50 in attorney’s fees; - $1,482 in costs; and - Pre-judgment interest at $3.60 per day from July 9, 2017, through the date judgment is entered.
Objections and Review
The recommendation gave the parties 14 days after service to file objections and warned that failing to object on time would waive the right to object. No objections or request for an extension had been filed by the date of the order.
The court explained that it ordinarily reviews properly challenged portions of a magistrate judge’s recommendation independently. For portions without a timely objection, the court reviews the record for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake. The court also applies that limited review when objections are only general or repeat earlier arguments.
Because the defendant filed no objections, the court held that the defendant waived the right to object to the recommendation and to obtain appellate review of it.
Ruling
Despite the waiver, the court reviewed the recommendation and found it well reasoned and grounded in fact and law. Judge Dale E. Ho adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The opinion therefore adopted the recommendation that default judgment be entered against the defendant with the listed awards of wages, liquidated damages, attorney’s fees, costs, and pre-judgment interest.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.