Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 4, 2022

Sothebys, Inc. v. Thut

Judge
Lewis Liman
Docket
1:21-cv-06574
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Sothebys v. Thut, Magistrate Judge Cave ordered defendants to respond to Sothebys’ default-judgment motion before deciding damages.

Who this affects

Sothebys, Inc. and defendants Frederic Thut, Bettina von Marnitz Thut, and FAAM, LLC.

What happened

In Sothebys, Inc. v. Thut, Sothebys asked the court for a default judgment awarding money and pre-judgment interest connected to property that defendants had consigned for auction.

The court gave Frederic Thut, Bettina von Marnitz Thut, and FAAM, LLC until February 18, 2022, to respond or request an in-court hearing. The order did not decide whether Sothebys would receive a default judgment or damages.

Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave ordered Sothebys to serve the defendants with the order and file proof of service by February 7, 2022. If the defendants did not respond or request a hearing, she said she intended to prepare a recommendation about the motion and damages based only on Sothebys’ written submissions.

The detailed version

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

Case
Sothebys, Inc. v. Thut · No. 1:21-cv-06574
Judge
Lewis Liman
Date
Feb. 4, 2022

Background

Sothebys, Inc. filed a motion for default judgment against Frederic Thut, Bettina von Marnitz Thut, and FAAM, LLC. Sothebys sought compensatory damages and pre-judgment interest for money the defendants allegedly received from the sale of property they had consigned to Sothebys for auction. Sothebys submitted a declaration and supporting evidence, and served the motion and those materials on the defendants on January 24, 2022.

Order

The district judge referred Sothebys’ motion to Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave for a report and recommendation. Judge Cave ordered the defendants to submit any response by February 18, 2022. They could also contact her chambers by that date to request an in-court hearing.

The order did not grant or deny the default-judgment motion and did not determine the amount of damages. It stated that, if the defendants failed to respond or request a hearing, Judge Cave intended to prepare a report and recommendation concerning the motion and damages based only on Sothebys’ written submissions, without an in-court hearing. Sothebys was ordered to serve the order on the defendants and file proof of service by February 7, 2022.

Classification

This is a procedural order concerning the handling of a default-judgment motion. The court directed the next steps but did not decide liability or damages.

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.