Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 10, 2025

Rose v. Willoughby

Judge
Kenneth Karas
Docket
7:21-cv-00769
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedureDiscovery
In one sentence

In Rose v. Willoughby, Judge Krause granted Rose’s motion to compel Willoughby to answer a judgment-enforcement subpoena.

Who this affects

Karlene Rose may pursue information from Robert Willoughby to enforce the existing money judgment. Robert Willoughby must provide complete responses to the information subpoena within 30 days after personal service of the required documents and may face contempt proceedings for noncompliance.

What happened

In Rose v. Willoughby, Robert Willoughby had not paid a prior money judgment against him for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. Karlene Rose sent him an information subpoena seeking details about bank accounts, income, real estate, and other assets that could help satisfy the judgment. Willoughby did not claim the subpoena, respond to the motion, or attend the scheduled conference.

The court explained that federal Rule 69 allows a judgment creditor to use state procedures to obtain information needed to collect a money judgment. New York law permits an information subpoena and allows a court to order compliance when the recipient does not respond. The court found that Rose properly served the subpoena and was entitled to the requested information.

Judge Krause granted Rose’s motion to compel. The court required Rose to personally serve Willoughby with specified case documents and proof of service, and ordered Willoughby to provide complete subpoena responses within 30 days after service. The court said Rose could seek contempt sanctions if he did not comply, and the order warned that contempt could result in a fine, imprisonment, or both.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Rose v. Willoughby · No. 7:21-cv-00769
Judge
Kenneth Karas
Date
Feb. 10, 2025

Background

On July 15, 2022, Judge Kenneth M. Karas entered a default judgment against Robert Willoughby for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The judgment awarded Karlene Rose $93,564, plus $28,620 in attorneys’ fees and $1,331.51 in costs.

To obtain information needed to enforce that judgment, Rose served Willoughby with an information subpoena by certified mail on October 7, 2024. The subpoena sought information about bank accounts, income, real estate, and other assets. The mailing was returned as “unclaimed,” and Willoughby did not respond.

Rose moved to compel a response on January 2, 2025. Her counsel served the motion by U.S. Mail. The court scheduled a February 7, 2025 conference and served the scheduling order by U.S. Mail. Willoughby did not contact Rose’s counsel or the court and did not attend the conference.

Legal standard and analysis

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 69 provides that a federal money judgment may be enforced using the procedures of the state where the federal court is located. It also permits the use of federal or state discovery procedures to obtain information relevant to satisfying the judgment.

The court applied New York law, which allows a judgment creditor to use an information subpoena to obtain information relevant to collecting a judgment. Under the cited New York provisions, responses generally must be returned within seven days after receipt, and a court may order compliance when the recipient fails to respond. The court concluded that Rose properly served the subpoena and that the requested information was discoverable under Rule 69.

Ruling and required actions

The court GRANTED Rose’s motion to compel, ECF No. 67. It required Rose to personally serve Willoughby under New York Civil Practice Law and Rules § 308 with copies of the Decision and Order, the three unpublished cases cited in the order, the motion papers, the October 7, 2024 information subpoena, the referral order, and the scheduling order. Rose must file proof of service on the docket.

Willoughby must provide full and complete responses to the information subpoena no later than 30 days after service. If he fails to comply, Rose may file a motion seeking contempt sanctions. The court also noted a prior warning from Judge Karas that failure to comply with court orders could lead to civil contempt, including a fine, imprisonment, or both. The Clerk of Court was directed to mark the motion as GRANTED and terminate it.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.