Coaction Specialty Management Company v. Emaxx Insurance Services
Coaction Specialty Management Company, Inc., New York Marine and General Insurance Company, Gotham Insurance Company, and Southwest Marine and General Insurance Company v. Emaxx Insurance Services, LLC, Ecaptiv PC3-IC, Inc., and John Ferrante
- Vernon Broderick
- 1:25-cv-07815
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Coaction v. Emaxx, Judge Broderick granted Coaction’s unopposed request for a certificate of default against eCaptiv PC3-IC, Inc.
The ruling directly affects eCaptiv PC3-IC, Inc. by directing entry of a certificate of default, and affects the plaintiffs by granting their unopposed application. The order does not decide the later default-judgment or damages issues.
What happened
In Coaction Specialty Management Company, Inc. v. Emaxx Insurance Services, LLC, the plaintiffs asked the court to enter a certificate of default against defendant eCaptiv PC3-IC, Inc. The request followed PC3’s refusal to post court-ordered security.
PC3 did not oppose the certificate of default, but said it intended to oppose any later request for a default judgment and would seek a hearing on damages. The plaintiffs requested that either the court or the Clerk of Court enter the certificate.
The court granted the application and directed the Clerk of Court to enter a certificate of default against PC3. Judge Vernon S. Broderick did not enter a default judgment or decide damages in this order.
The detailed version
- Coaction Specialty Management Company v. Emaxx Insurance Services · No. 1:25-cv-07815
- Vernon Broderick
- July 15, 2026
Background
The plaintiffs, collectively called “Coaction” in the motion, sought a certificate of default against eCaptiv PC3-IC, Inc., referred to as “PC3.” The motion stated that the court had ordered PC3 to post security under New York Insurance Law § 1213(c)(1). The motion stated that the required security was $6,028,331.99, that the court extended the deadline once, and that the court later confirmed that security was due on June 15, 2026. According to the motion, PC3 informed the court on that date that it would not post the security.
Motion and Positions
Coaction relied on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) and Local Rule 55.1(b), which concern entry of default. Coaction asked the court either to enter a certificate of default against PC3 or to direct the Clerk of Court to do so. The motion stated that the Clerk’s Office had found the matter’s procedural posture unusual and that this could make issuance of a certificate difficult.
PC3 did not oppose the motion for a certificate of default. PC3 stated, however, that it intended to oppose any later motion for a default judgment and would seek a hearing on damages at the appropriate time.
Ruling
Judge Vernon S. Broderick granted the application. The court directed the Clerk of Court to enter a certificate of default as to PC3. The order did not enter a default judgment and did not decide damages.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.