Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 7, 2022

Medina v. The City of New York

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:20-cv-00797
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
5
Civil ProcedureCivil RightsSection 1983
In one sentence

In Medina v. The City of New York, Judge Caproni adopted the damages recommendation, awarded $56,081.65 against Gordon’s, and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.

Who this affects

Zahirah Medina received a $56,081.65 damages award against Gordon’s Auto Sales, LLC, plus post-judgment interest. Gordon’s is responsible for the award, while Medina may not proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal.

What happened

In Medina v. The City of New York, Zahirah Medina sued the City, a police officer, Gordon’s Auto Sales, LLC, and other officers over her August 3, 2018 arrest. The court had already dismissed the claims against the City and Officer Christopher Wintermute, leaving Gordon’s as the only defendant, but Gordon’s never answered or appeared.

The court had entered a default judgment against Gordon’s and sent the question of damages to Magistrate Judge Cave. After Gordon’s failed to respond, Judge Cave recommended awarding Medina $56,081.65. Neither side objected to that recommendation.

Judge Valerie Caproni adopted the recommendation in full and awarded Medina $56,081.65 against Gordon’s: $38,880 in compensatory damages, $10,000 for emotional distress, $5,938.10 in lost wages, and $1,263.55 in costs, plus post-judgment interest from January 15, 2021, until payment. The court also denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees and terminated the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Medina v. The City of New York · No. 1:20-cv-00797
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
Feb. 7, 2022

Background

Zahirah Medina brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal civil-rights statute, and New York law arising from her August 3, 2018 arrest. She sued the City of New York, Police Officer Christopher Wintermute, Gordon’s Auto Sales, LLC, and John Doe police officers. The court had dismissed all claims against the City and Wintermute and stated that Gordon’s was the only remaining defendant.

Gordon’s did not answer the complaint or otherwise appear. The Clerk entered a certificate of default, and the Court later entered default judgment against Gordon’s. A default judgment is a judgment entered when a defendant fails to defend the case; the court then directed Medina to submit evidence concerning the amount of damages.

Damages Recommendation

Medina moved for an inquest, meaning a proceeding to determine damages after liability has been established by default. The Court referred that issue to Magistrate Judge Cave. Gordon’s did not respond to the motion or contact the court after being warned that Judge Cave could decide the damages issue using Medina’s written submissions alone.

On January 12, 2022, Judge Cave recommended total damages of $56,081.65, consisting of $38,880 in compensatory damages, $10,000 for emotional distress, $5,938.10 in lost wages, and $1,263.55 in costs. The recommendation also included post-judgment interest under 28 U.S.C. § 1961. The parties were given fourteen days to object, but neither party filed objections.

Ruling

Judge Valerie Caproni reviewed the recommendation for clear error because no objections were filed and found none. The Court adopted the recommendation in full and awarded Medina $56,081.65 against Gordon’s Auto Sales, LLC, plus post-judgment interest under 28 U.S.C. § 1961 from January 15, 2021—the date of the default judgment—until Gordon’s pays.

The Court stated that the failure to object precluded appellate review of the decision. It certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying filing fees for an appeal. The Clerk was directed to close the pending damages motion, terminate the case, and mail the order to Gordon’s and its registered agent.

Classification

This is a procedural order under the stated classification rules because the damages award followed Gordon’s nonappearance and default rather than an adversarial decision on the merits of the underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 5-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.