Applebaum v. Magnolis US LLC and Magonis Boats SL
- Sarah Cave
- 1:24-cv-01861
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Robert Applebaum v. Magnolis US LLC, Judge Cave ordered defendants to respond to Applebaum’s damages submission before deciding whether a hearing is needed.
Robert Applebaum and the defaulting defendants, Magnolis US LLC and Magonis Boats SL, are affected by the deadlines and the possible decision on damages based only on written submissions.
What happened
Robert Applebaum v. Magnolis US LLC and Magonis Boats SL concerns the damages portion of Applebaum’s request for a judgment after the defendants failed to defend the case. The order does not decide how much money, if any, Applebaum should receive.
Applebaum submitted a legal memorandum, an attorney declaration, and exhibits supporting his damages request. The case had been referred to Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave to examine damages.
Judge Cave ordered the defaulting defendants to respond by September 17, 2025, or contact her chambers by that date to request an in-court hearing. If they do neither, she intends to recommend a damages amount based only on Applebaum’s written submissions. Applebaum must serve the order and file proof of service by September 10, 2025.
The detailed version
- Applebaum v. Magnolis US LLC and Magonis Boats SL · No. 1:24-cv-01861
- Sarah Cave
- Sept. 3, 2025
Background
The order concerns an inquest on damages, meaning the court’s process for evaluating the amount of damages after defendants have defaulted. The opinion states that Judge Jennifer H. Rearden referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave for that purpose.
Submissions and Deadlines
Robert Applebaum submitted a memorandum of law supporting his motion for default judgment, together with a supporting attorney declaration and exhibits. The order refers to these materials collectively as the “Damages Submission.”
The defaulting defendants must submit any response to the Damages Submission by Wednesday, September 17, 2025. They may instead—or in addition—contact Judge Cave’s chambers by that date to request an in-court hearing.
Court’s Action
Judge Cave stated that if the defaulting defendants do not respond or request a hearing by the deadline, she intends to issue a report and recommendation about damages based only on Applebaum’s written submissions and without an in-court hearing. The order cites Second Circuit authority stating that a damages hearing is not required if the court ensures there is a basis for the damages specified in a default judgment.
The order directs Applebaum to serve it on the defaulting defendants and file proof of service on the docket by Wednesday, September 10, 2025. It does not itself award damages, enter a default judgment, or state the amount of damages.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.