Liberty Holdings LLC v. Aposta, Inc.
- Loretta Preska
- 1:18-cv-05108
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 9
In Liberty Holdings v. Aposta, Judge Preska struck defendants’ answer, entered default judgment, and revoked counsel’s admission for repeated noncompliance.
Aposta, Inc. and Gene Hacker were subject to having their answer stricken and to the entry of default judgment. Their counsel, Vincent J. Quigg, had his temporary admission to practice revoked. The plaintiffs may seek a damages hearing and additional attorney-fee sanctions.
What happened
Liberty Holdings (NYC) LLC v. Aposta, Inc. concerned defendants’ repeated failures to follow court orders, attend required conferences, pay a previously imposed $7,700 sanction, and complete discovery. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
After defendants’ counsel Vincent J. Quigg missed additional conferences and did not respond to an order explaining why sanctions should not be imposed, the court proceeded without him. The court had previously warned that continued violations could lead to severe sanctions.
Judge Preska granted Quigg’s request for temporary admission to practice in the case retroactively, directed the Clerk to strike Aposta and Gene Hacker’s answer, entered a default judgment against them, and directed the Clerk to revoke Quigg’s admission. The plaintiffs may seek a damages hearing and additional attorney-fee sanctions.
The detailed version
- Liberty Holdings LLC v. Aposta, Inc. · No. 1:18-cv-05108
- Loretta Preska
- May 21, 2020
Background
In an earlier order dated November 13, 2019, the court imposed $7,700 in monetary sanctions on Aposta, Inc., Gene Hacker, and their counsel, Vincent J. Quigg, for repeated, deliberate failures to appear at court-ordered conferences. The court ordered the sanction paid within 45 days and warned that further violations could lead to more severe sanctions.
Plaintiffs later reported that the sanction had not been paid and that defendants had failed to comply with discovery obligations. At a January 30, 2020 conference, Quigg did not appear. Another attorney, Harold J. Pokel, appeared but explained that he had not been retained and had not received materials sufficient to prepare for the conference.
On February 4, 2020, the court ordered Quigg to explain why defendants’ answer should not be stricken, why a default should not be entered, and why additional sanctions should not be imposed on him or defendants. Quigg filed no response. The court later denied his request to postpone a May 19 hearing, and Quigg did not appear at that hearing either.
Legal standard
The court applied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(f)(1)(C), which permits sanctions when an attorney or party fails to appear at a scheduling or other pretrial conference, fails to participate in good faith, or fails to obey a scheduling or pretrial order. The court stated that available sanctions can include striking pleadings, dismissal, entry of a default judgment, and contempt of court.
Court’s reasoning
The court identified several grounds for additional sanctions: the unpaid $7,700 sanction; Quigg’s repeated last-minute requests to postpone proceedings, which the court described as misleading; and his failure to appear at two additional court-ordered conferences. The court also noted that Quigg did not show any reason why the proposed sanctions should not be imposed.
The opinion addresses sanctions for failure to follow court orders and does not decide the merits of plaintiffs’ underlying claims. A default judgment was entered because of defendants’ litigation violations and nonappearance, rather than after an adversarial decision on the underlying claims.
Disposition
The court granted Quigg’s original request for temporary admission to practice in the case, retroactive to October 3, 2018. It directed the Clerk to strike the answer filed by Aposta, Inc. and Gene Hacker, entered a default judgment against Aposta, Inc. and Gene Hacker, and directed the Clerk to revoke Quigg’s temporary admission in the Southern District of New York.
The court stated that plaintiffs may initiate a damages hearing before the judge and may make an additional request for attorney-fee sanctions against Quigg and/or defendants from the date of the November 13, 2019 sanctions order.
Read the full 9-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.