Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 28, 2020

People of The State of New York v. Debt Resolve, Inc.

Judge
Alison Nathan
Docket
1:18-cv-09812
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In People of New York v. Debt Resolve, Inc., Judge Nathan ordered action on the remaining defaulted defendant’s case.

Who this affects

The order directly affects the People of the State of New York and Hutton Ventures, LLC. New York must either seek default judgment or explain why it should not do so; Hutton Ventures remains the defendant against whom the case continues.

What happened

The People of the State of New York v. Debt Resolve, Inc. involved claims that continued against Hutton Ventures, LLC after the other named defendants entered a stipulated final judgment and order.

New York had received a certificate of default against Hutton Ventures on May 6, 2019, but had not filed a motion asking the court to enter default judgment. The opinion does not decide the underlying claims.

Judge Alison J. Nathan ordered New York, within two weeks, either to move for default judgment against Hutton Ventures or explain why it should not do so. The court warned that failing to comply could lead to dismissal of the claims with prejudice for failure to prosecute.

The detailed version

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

Case
People of The State of New York v. Debt Resolve, Inc. · No. 1:18-cv-09812
Judge
Alison Nathan
Date
July 28, 2020

Background

The court noted that a stipulated final judgment and order had resolved the case against Debt Resolve, Inc., Student Loan Care, LLC, Progress Advocates, LLC, Bruce Bellmare, and Stanley E. Freimuth. The case against Hutton Ventures, LLC was still pending.

New York had obtained a certificate of default against Hutton Ventures on May 6, 2019. A certificate of default records that a party failed to defend the case, but it does not itself enter a judgment awarding relief. The court stated that New York had not later moved for default judgment.

Order

The court ordered New York, within two weeks, either to file a motion for default judgment against Hutton Ventures under the court’s individual practices or to file a status update explaining why it should not file that motion. The court warned that failure to comply by the deadline might result in dismissal of the claims with prejudice for failure to prosecute. The order did not itself enter default judgment or dismiss the claims.

Disposition

Judge Alison J. Nathan issued a case-management order requiring further action by New York. The opinion does not reach the merits of the claims against Hutton Ventures.

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.