Eisenberg v. Gold Flowers Design Inc.
- Paul Davison
- 7:20-cv-02488-PED
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Eisenberg v. Gold Flowers Design, Judge Davison ordered plaintiffs to support their requested damages with comparable New York awards.
Elaine Eisenberg and Douglas Eisenberg, who sought damages, and The Mansion at Lawrence, LLC, against which liability had already been entered by default.
What happened
In Eisenberg v. Gold Flowers Design, Judge Halpern had entered a default judgment on liability against The Mansion at Lawrence, LLC and referred the damages question for further review. Plaintiffs Elaine Eisenberg and Douglas Eisenberg submitted proposed findings requesting $175,000 for Elaine’s pain and suffering and $7,500 for Douglas’s loss-of-services claim.
The court noted that plaintiffs had not cited similar New York cases supporting those amounts. The defendant had not opposed the submission or contacted the court.
Judge Paul E. Davison ordered plaintiffs to file a supplemental submission by March 9, 2022, identifying comparable approved awards from similar cases. The order did not decide the amount of damages.
The detailed version
- Eisenberg v. Gold Flowers Design Inc. · No. 7:20-cv-02488-PED
- Paul Davison
- Feb. 16, 2022
Background
Judge Halpern previously entered a default judgment as to liability against The Mansion at Lawrence, LLC and referred the matter to Judge Davison for an inquest concerning damages. Judge Davison then issued a scheduling order requiring plaintiffs to submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, including the exact amounts sought and an explanation of how they calculated those amounts.
Plaintiffs timely filed their submission. The Mansion at Lawrence, LLC did not file opposition or otherwise contact the court. Plaintiffs’ submission requested $175,000 for Elaine Eisenberg’s pain and suffering and $7,500 for Douglas Eisenberg’s spousal derivative claim for loss of services.
Court’s analysis
The court stated that damages after a default judgment in a diversity case are governed by state-law standards. Under New York law, courts use approved awards in similar cases as guides when determining appropriate damages. The court found that plaintiffs had not cited comparable case law supporting their requested amounts.
Ruling
Judge Paul E. Davison directed plaintiffs to file a supplemental submission by March 9, 2022, setting out comparable approved awards from similar cases. Plaintiffs were also directed to serve the order on The Mansion at Lawrence, LLC and file an affidavit confirming service. The order did not award or determine the amount of damages.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.