Surfside Solutions Inc. v. Helix House LLC
- Ho
- 1:24-cv-06305
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Surfside Solutions v. Helix House: Judge Ho adopted the damages recommendation after granting default judgment against Helix House.
Surfside Solutions Inc. and Helix House LLC; the order awards damages, interest, and attorney’s fees against Helix House based on the default judgment.
What happened
In Surfside Solutions Inc. v. Helix House LLC, Surfside sought default judgment because Helix House had appeared but had not answered. The court had already granted the motion and sent the questions of damages and attorney’s fees to a magistrate judge.
The court found no error in the magistrate judge’s unopposed recommendation and adopted it in full. The recommendation called for $195,249.72 in actual damages, 12% yearly interest before judgment, $7,775 in attorney’s fees, and post-judgment interest at the federal rate.
Judge Dale E. Ho ordered Surfside to file a proposed judgment consistent with the order within 14 days. The opinion does not state the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Surfside Solutions Inc. v. Helix House LLC · No. 1:24-cv-06305
- Ho
- Oct. 22, 2025
Background
Surfside Solutions Inc. moved for default judgment against Helix House LLC. Helix House had appeared in the case but had not filed an answer. The Clerk of Court issued a certificate of default, and the court later ordered Helix House to explain why default judgment should not be entered. Helix House did not respond.
On April 23, 2025, the court granted Surfside’s motion for default judgment and referred the calculation of damages and attorney’s fees to Magistrate Judge Moses. After an inquest process, Judge Moses issued a Report and Recommendation.
Report and Recommendation
The Report recommended awarding Surfside $195,249.72 in actual damages; pre-judgment interest at the contractual rate of 12% per year, which totaled $55,076.47 as of the Report’s date; $7,775 in attorney’s fees; and post-judgment interest at the federal statutory rate.
The parties had 14 days to object to the Report. No objections were filed. Because there were no timely objections, Judge Ho reviewed the Report for clear error on the face of the record. The court stated that it found no error, clear or otherwise.
Ruling
Judge Ho ordered that the Report be adopted in full. The court directed Surfside to file a proposed judgment consistent with the order within 14 days. The opinion does not identify the underlying claims or state that the proposed judgment itself had already been entered.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.