K & S Produce, Inc. v. SY 44 Food Corp
- John Cronan
- 1:20-cv-09663
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In K&S Produce v. SY 44 Food, Judge Cronan requested clarification before deciding proposed default judgment, including interest and a disputed invoice.
K&S Produce, Inc., which sought a proposed default judgment, and SY 44 Food Corp. and the other defendants, against whom judgment was proposed.
What happened
K&S Produce, Inc. submitted a proposed default judgment against SY 44 Food Corp. and the other defendants. The court did not enter judgment because it needed more information.
The court questioned whether the contract allowed 9% prejudgment interest and whether federal law permits that interest without a contractual provision. It also questioned whether post-judgment interest could exceed the rate set by 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a), and asked about a $10,000 invoice labeled “BOUNCE CHECK” that did not identify purchased commodities.
The court ordered K&S Produce to submit, within one week, a letter addressing those issues and supporting the disputed charge. Judge John P. Cronan therefore left the proposed default judgment unresolved.
The detailed version
- K & S Produce, Inc. v. SY 44 Food Corp · No. 1:20-cv-09663
- John Cronan
- May 27, 2021
Background
K&S Produce, Inc. submitted a proposed default judgment. Before entering judgment, the court required clarification about the damages and interest requested.
Issues Identified by the Court
The plaintiff requested prejudgment interest at a 9% rate. The court explained that the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (PACA) does not itself clearly establish a right to prejudgment interest, although reasonable contractual interest provisions are enforceable under PACA. The court asked whether the contract provided for prejudgment interest. If it did, the plaintiff had to attach the contract and identify the specific provision. If it did not, the plaintiff had to explain the legal authority for awarding prejudgment interest without a contractual provision and why a 9% rate was appropriate. The plaintiff could instead withdraw that request.
The plaintiff also requested post-judgment interest at 9%. The court stated that it appeared post-judgment interest could be awarded only at the rate provided by 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a). The plaintiff had to state whether it withdrew the 9% request or explain the legal basis for seeking a higher rate.
The court also questioned the principal damages. It appeared that $10,000 of the requested $48,465.25 came from a November 27, 2019 invoice. Unlike the other invoices provided, that invoice did not list commodities and instead identified one item as “BOUNCE CHECK.” The court directed the plaintiff to clarify the invoice and explain why the $10,000 charge was covered by 7 U.S.C. § 499e(c).
Order and Effect
The court ordered K&S Produce to submit a letter of no more than three pages within one week after the order was filed. The opinion did not enter the proposed default judgment or finally resolve the requested damages and interest. Judge John P. Cronan signed the order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.