Vega v. Trinity Realty Corp.
- Richard Sullivan
- 1:14-cv-07417
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Vega v. Trinity Realty Corp., Judge Sullivan allowed defendants to seek cancellation of default judgments without deciding whether service was valid.
Trinity Realty Corporation and Phillip Phan received permission to file a motion challenging the default judgments; Josue Vega was given an opportunity to oppose that motion.
What happened
In Vega v. Trinity Realty Corp., Trinity Realty Corporation and Phillip Phan asked for permission to challenge default judgments entered against them in 2015. They argued that Josue Vega had not properly served them, so the court lacked authority over them.
The defendants also described defenses to Vega’s wage claims, including that free housing counted as compensation and that Vega was not required to work continuously for Trinity. The court did not decide whether those defenses were valid.
Judge Sullivan granted the defendants’ request to file a motion seeking to vacate the default judgments. He set deadlines for the motion, Vega’s opposition, and the defendants’ reply.
The detailed version
- Vega v. Trinity Realty Corp. · No. 1:14-cv-07417
- Richard Sullivan
- Oct. 20, 2020
Background
The court had previously entered default judgments in the case on March 6, 2015, and November 25, 2015. The defendants’ October 16, 2020 letter asked for permission to file a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(4). That rule allows a party to seek relief from a judgment that is void. The defendants argued that the judgments were void because Vega had not properly served Trinity Realty Corporation or Phillip Phan, meaning the court allegedly never obtained personal jurisdiction—the authority to exercise power over those defendants.
Defendants’ arguments
The defendants claimed that substitute service on Phan occurred at an address where he did not live and that the address did not exist. They also claimed that service on Trinity was made at an address associated with a different entity, Trinity Realty Group, LLC, rather than Trinity Realty Corporation. The defendants said these service issues warranted an evidentiary hearing.
The letter also described potential defenses to Vega’s underlying wage claims under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. The defendants asserted that rent-free housing provided to Vega should count as compensation, that Vega did not work continuously as he claimed, and that he was an independent contractor. These were defendants’ proposed arguments; the order did not decide them.
Ruling
The court granted the defendants’ request for permission to file the motion to vacate the default judgments. The order required the defendants to file that motion by November 2, 2020; Vega to file any opposition by November 16, 2020; and the defendants to file any reply by November 23, 2020. The order did not itself vacate the default judgments or decide whether service was proper. The parties’ legal memoranda also had to comply with the court’s formatting and length rules.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.