Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.OtherFiled Jan. 13, 2021

Goett v. V1 Jets International Inc.

Judge
Barbara Moses
Docket
1:14-cv-08256
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureFlsa
In one sentence

In Goett v. V1 Jets, Judge Moses ordered briefing before deciding whether to issue a supplemental judgment updating post-judgment interest.

Who this affects

The order directly concerns Joseph Goett’s request to update the judgment against V1 Jets International, Inc., V1 Jet Holdings, Inc., Travelsuite, Inc., Jaime Matta, and Andrew Zarrow. It leaves the requested supplemental judgment and applicable interest rate unresolved.

What happened

Goett v. V1 Jets International Inc. concerns Joseph Goett’s request to update a 2015 judgment arising from alleged unpaid minimum wages and overtime under federal and New York law. The judgment awarded $66,613.67 plus interest at 9 percent per year.

Goett asked the court to issue a supplemental judgment for $97,394.66, reflecting interest through January 5, 2021, after the court clerk rejected an abstract that used open-ended interest language. He also asked for a total amount that could be recorded with the New York County Clerk.

Judge Barbara Moses did not decide the request. She ordered Goett to submit legal authorities explaining whether a federal court may issue this type of supplemental judgment and why the interest rate should be 9 percent under New York law rather than the federal rate.

The detailed version

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

Case
Goett v. V1 Jets International Inc. · No. 1:14-cv-08256
Judge
Barbara Moses
Date
Jan. 13, 2021

Background

Joseph Goett brought claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the New York Labor Law, alleging that the defendants failed to pay the required minimum wage, overtime wages, and related amounts. After the parties executed and obtained approval of a settlement that was apparently breached, Goett obtained a November 20, 2015 judgment against V1 Jets International, Inc., V1 Jet Holdings, Inc., Travelsuite, Inc., Jaime Matta, and Andrew Zarrow.

The judgment stated a total amount of $66,613.67 and provided for post-judgment interest at 9 percent per year. In September 2020, the clerk issued an abstract of judgment describing the award as $66,613.67 plus post-judgment interest at 9 percent per year. Goett later sought an abstract stating a total balance of $96,474.84 as of November 10, 2020, but the clerk rejected it as listing the wrong amount.

Request for a Supplemental Judgment

By a January 5, 2021 letter-motion, Goett asked the court to enter a supplemental judgment for $97,394.66, representing the original principal amount plus 9 percent interest through the date of the motion. He explained that the New York County Clerk’s office had rejected the earlier abstract and would record only an abstract listing a specific total amount rather than open-ended language about interest.

Court’s Order

Judge Moses ordered Goett to submit, by January 22, 2021, a letter-brief or memorandum addressing the legal authority for the requested supplemental judgment. The court specifically asked for authority allowing a federal court to update a judgment for post-judgment interest that accrued after the original judgment, where the request did not correct a mistake in that judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a) or award additional relief based on further proceedings under Rule 54(b).

The court also directed Goett to explain why the judgment should use New York’s 9 percent interest rate rather than the federal rate under 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a). Judge Moses cited decisions indicating that federal courts in New York often award 9 percent prejudgment interest but use the federal statutory rate for post-judgment interest in FLSA and New York Labor Law cases. The order did not grant or deny the request for a supplemental judgment and did not resolve the proper interest rate.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.