Kreisler v. 44 Lexington Associates

Background

44 Lexington Associates, LLC filed an answer and crossclaim on May 1, 2025. The court held that the crossclaim was effectively served on 517 Lex, LLC that day because 517 Lex had already appeared in the case and its counsel was a registered user of the court’s electronic filing system. The court stated that 517 Lex had not answered the crossclaim and therefore appeared to be in default on it.

Motions

On August 2, 2025, 44 Lexington filed a motion seeking entry of default against 517 Lex on the crossclaim. The court said that filing appeared to be a procedurally deficient attempt to request the Clerk’s Certificate of Default. On August 25, 2025, 44 Lexington filed a motion for default judgment against 517 Lex without first obtaining that certificate.

Ruling

The court denied the pending motion for default judgment without prejudice to renewal once the Clerk’s Certificate of Default is obtained. The order allowed 44 Lexington to refile its motion within two weeks, in accordance with the court’s rules and practices. It also explained that the renewed motion must comply with the applicable federal and local rules, including requirements concerning the certificate of default, operative pleadings, proof of service, and a proposed default-judgment order. If counsel submits calculations, counsel must also email native versions of the calculation files to chambers.

The court stated that, if a renewed motion is filed, it will issue a further order setting deadlines for opposition and reply and scheduling a hearing requiring the parties to explain their positions. If no motion is filed by the deadline, the court stated that the crossclaim may be dismissed for failure to prosecute without further notice. The Clerk was directed to terminate ECF Nos. 31 and 39. The order did not decide the merits of the crossclaim or enter default judgment.