Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 17, 2021

Pearson Education, Inc. v. Labos

Judge
John Cronan
Docket
1:19-cv-00487
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Pearson v. Labos, Judge Cronan scheduled a hearing on Szymanska’s default and possible vacatur of her certificate of default.

Who this affects

The plaintiffs and Defendant Szymanska, who was proceeding without a lawyer.

What happened

In Pearson Education, Inc. v. Labos, the plaintiffs sought a default judgment against Defendant Szymanska. She appeared without a lawyer at an earlier hearing, requested more time to respond, and filed an opposition.

The court scheduled the plaintiffs and Szymanska to appear for a hearing on July 20, 2021. The parties were directed to discuss whether the court should set aside the certificate of default entered against Szymanska.

Judge John P. Cronan did not decide the default-judgment motion in this order. He directed Szymanska to be prepared to explain the defense she would present if the certificate of default were set aside, and directed service of the order on her.

The detailed version

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

Case
Pearson Education, Inc. v. Labos · No. 1:19-cv-00487
Judge
John Cronan
Date
June 17, 2021

Background

The plaintiffs moved for default judgment against Defendant Szymanska on December 11, 2020. The court later ordered Szymanska to appear and explain why default judgment should not be entered. She appeared at the February 4, 2021 hearing without a lawyer and requested additional time to oppose the motion. The court granted that request, and Szymanska filed her opposition on March 19, 2021. The plaintiffs filed a reply on April 5, 2021.

Order

The court directed the plaintiffs and Szymanska to appear at a July 20, 2021 hearing. They were instructed to discuss whether vacating, or setting aside, the Certificate of Default entered against Szymanska was appropriate under the Second Circuit’s stated three-factor standard: whether the default was willful, whether setting it aside would prejudice the opposing party, and whether Szymanska had presented a potentially valid defense.

Szymanska was specifically directed to be prepared to explain the defense she would present if the Certificate of Default were vacated. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail her a copy of the order, and the plaintiffs were directed to serve her by email and file proof of service by June 22, 2021.

Disposition

Judge John P. Cronan scheduled the hearing and issued service instructions. This order did not grant or deny the plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment and did not decide whether to vacate the Certificate of Default.

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.