Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 25, 2019

Experience Hendrix, L.L.C. v. Pitsicalis

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:17-cv-01927
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Experience Hendrix, LLC v. Pitsicalis, Judge Engelmayer scheduled a hearing on plaintiffs’ default-judgment motion and ordered service on three unrepresented defendants.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs and the three defendants targeted by the default-judgment motion: Carmen Cottone, Green Cures & Botanical Distribution, Inc., and Grassroots Clothing, LLC.

What happened

In Experience Hendrix, LLC v. Pitsicalis, the plaintiffs moved for a default judgment against Carmen Cottone, Green Cures & Botanical Distribution, Inc., and Grassroots Clothing, LLC. The opinion describes Cottone as representing herself and the two companies as unrepresented.

The court scheduled a hearing on the motion for December 16, 2019, at 2:30 p.m. The plaintiffs had to serve the order, the motion, and supporting papers on the three defendants and file proof of service by December 6, 2019.

Judge Engelmayer issued this scheduling and service order on November 25, 2019. The order did not grant or deny the motion for default judgment.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Experience Hendrix, L.L.C. v. Pitsicalis · No. 1:17-cv-01927
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
Nov. 25, 2019

Background

On November 22, 2019, the plaintiffs filed a motion for default judgment against Carmen Cottone, Green Cures & Botanical Distribution, Inc., and Grassroots Clothing, LLC. The opinion describes Cottone as a defendant without a lawyer and the two corporate defendants as also without representation. The corporate defendants had been unrepresented since October 21, 2019, and had been warned since September 18, 2019, that failing to obtain counsel could result in a default judgment. The court also stated that a non-lawyer may not represent a separate legal entity such as a corporation.

Order

The court ordered that a hearing on the plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment be held on December 16, 2019, at 2:30 p.m., during a conference that had already been scheduled in the case. The plaintiffs were directed to promptly serve the order, the motion, and the supporting papers on the specified defendants. They were also directed to file proof of service by December 6, 2019.

Disposition

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer issued a scheduling and service order. The opinion does not state that the court granted or denied the motion for default judgment; it only set a hearing and imposed service-related requirements.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.