Cury, Jr. v. Bradshaw
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:20-cv-03351
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Cury, Jr. v. Bradshaw, Judge Netburn ordered written submissions for deciding damages after liability was established by default judgment.
Thomas B. Cury, Jr. and Kathleen R. Bradshaw are affected: Cury must submit evidence supporting his damages claims, and Bradshaw may respond and submit competing evidence.
What happened
In Cury, Jr. v. Bradshaw, the court had already entered a default judgment against Kathleen R. Bradshaw on liability. The case was referred for a review of the damages claimed by Thomas B. Cury, Jr.
The order requires Cury to submit proposed factual findings, legal conclusions, affidavits, and other documents supporting all claimed damages and other monetary relief within 30 days. He must mail the filings and order to Bradshaw’s last known address. Bradshaw may respond within 30 days after service and may submit her own proposed findings and evidence.
Judge Sarah Netburn ordered that the damages review may be decided from written submissions alone. A party seeking a hearing must explain why one is needed and identify the witnesses and evidence involved. The order schedules the damages process but does not decide the amount of damages.
The detailed version
- Cury, Jr. v. Bradshaw · No. 1:20-cv-03351
- Paul Engelmayer
- Dec. 15, 2020
Background
On December 14, 2020, District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer referred the case to Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn to conduct an inquest—a court review—and prepare a report and recommendation concerning Plaintiff Thomas B. Cury, Jr.’s damages. The opinion states that a default judgment on liability had already been entered against Defendant Kathleen R. Bradshaw, Esq., also known as Kathleen Bradshaw.
Order
The court ordered Cury to file proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law within 30 days after entry of the order. The filing must describe all claimed damages and any other requested monetary relief. Cury must support the filing with affidavits and other documentary evidence, and each proposed factual finding must cite the supporting evidence. He must also mail a complete copy of the filing and the order to Bradshaw’s last known address and file proof of service.
Bradshaw may file a response within 30 days after being served. She must respond to each proposed finding and conclusion and may submit counter-findings and counter-conclusions. Her factual assertions must also be supported by affidavits or other documentary evidence, with citations to the supporting evidence.
Damages Inquest Procedure
The court notified the parties that it may conduct the damages inquest entirely through written submissions. A party seeking an evidentiary hearing must explain why written submissions would not be sufficient and describe the witnesses and evidence that would be presented.
Disposition and Effect
Judge Sarah Netburn entered a scheduling order for the damages inquest. The order does not determine the amount of damages or otherwise resolve the damages claim. This is a procedural order concerning the next steps after the default judgment on liability.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.