Trustees Of The New York City District Council Of Carpenters Pension Fund v…

Background

On February 20, 2025, Judge Lorna G. Schofield entered a default judgment against Prime Installations Inc. and G & S Concepts, Inc. The opinion does not state the underlying causes of action or the amount of damages sought. Judge Schofield referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky for an inquest, meaning a court review to determine the proper amount of damages after a defendant has failed to participate.

Required submissions

The court ordered the plaintiffs to file proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law by March 24, 2025. Those submissions must explain the basis for the default judgment, including how and when the defendants were served and the later procedural history. They must also establish personal jurisdiction over the defendants, subject-matter jurisdiction, and liability on each asserted cause of action. The plaintiffs must identify the legal basis and calculation for every requested form of damages or other monetary relief and state the exact amount sought and any precise non-monetary relief requested.

If the plaintiffs seek actual damages, they must provide admissible evidence sufficient to allow the court to determine the amount with reasonable certainty. Declarations or affidavits based on personal knowledge may be used, with authenticated supporting documents. Each proposed factual finding must cite the supporting declaration paragraph or documentary page, and the plaintiffs must connect the requested damages to their legal claims.

Any request for attorneys’ fees must be supported by authenticated, contemporaneous time records showing each timekeeper’s date of service, hours, hourly rate when applicable, and work performed. The plaintiffs must also provide admissible evidence about each timekeeper’s identity, background, and qualifications, along with documentation of costs and expenses.

Service and response deadlines

If the plaintiffs intend to rely on earlier filings, they must identify the relevant requirement and the docket numbers and pages supporting it in a letter filed by March 6, 2025. Before filing their proposed findings and supporting materials, the plaintiffs must serve them, along with a copy of the order, on the defaulting defendants by mail and email. The plaintiffs must file proof of service.

The defaulting defendants were ordered to serve and file any responses to the plaintiffs’ proposed findings and supporting materials by April 14, 2025. The court stated that it may conduct the damages inquest solely through written submissions. A party requesting an evidentiary hearing must explain why written submissions are insufficient and describe the witnesses and evidence it would present.

Disposition

This order sets procedures and deadlines for determining damages after the previously entered default judgment. It does not state a final damages amount or award attorneys’ fees. Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky issued the order on March 3, 2025.