Hyman v. G&G Pelham Food Corp.
- George Daniels
- 1:18-cv-05779
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Hyman v. G&G Pelham Food, Judge Gorenstein could not award damages yet but allowed another affidavit because counsel lacked personal knowledge.
The order affected Anthony Hyman’s effort to obtain damages from the defaulting defendants by requiring adequate, firsthand proof of the damages amount.
What happened
In Hyman v. G&G Pelham Food Corp., the court said that a defendant’s default establishes liability, but a plaintiff must still provide adequate proof of damages. Anthony Hyman had been given an opportunity to submit proof about damages.
Hyman submitted an affidavit from his attorney instead of an affidavit from someone with personal knowledge. The attorney relied on the complaint and did not personally know facts about Hyman’s salary or efforts to reduce his losses.
The court therefore could not award damages based on the submitted materials, but it gave Hyman another opportunity to submit a damages affidavit by November 26, 2019. Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein also allowed any response within 14 days after that filing.
The detailed version
- Hyman v. G&G Pelham Food Corp. · No. 1:18-cv-05779
- George Daniels
- Nov. 12, 2019
Background
The court addressed proof of damages after an entry of default. It explained that a default establishes a defendant’s liability, but the plaintiff must still provide adequate evidence supporting the amount of damages.
The court had previously ordered the plaintiff to submit materials concerning damages. Instead of an affidavit from someone with personal knowledge, the plaintiff submitted an affidavit from his attorney. The attorney relied on the allegations in the complaint and did not have personal knowledge of facts concerning the plaintiff’s salary or efforts to reduce his losses.
Court’s Analysis
The court stated that an attorney’s affidavit based only on the complaint is not sufficient proof of damages when the attorney lacks personal knowledge of the relevant facts. Without adequate proof, the court could not award damages.
Disposition
The court did not award damages on the materials submitted. It gave the plaintiff another opportunity to file an affidavit addressing damages by November 26, 2019. Any response could be filed within 14 days after the affidavit was filed. The order was signed by United States Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.