G & G Closed Circuit Events, LLC v. Batista
- Alvin Hellerstein
- 1:21-cv-07352
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In G & G Closed Circuit Events v. Batista, Judge Aaron set deadlines for responding to a default-judgment motion and addressing a possible written damages proceeding.
The plaintiff and defendants in G & G Closed Circuit Events, LLC v. Batista were affected: the defendants received a response deadline, the plaintiff received a service-and-filing deadline, and any party seeking a damages hearing had to provide additional information.
What happened
In G & G Closed Circuit Events, LLC v. Batista, the plaintiff asked for a default judgment against the defendants. The opinion does not decide whether default judgment should be granted or determine any damages.
The court ordered the defendants to respond to the motion by March 21, 2022. It also ordered the plaintiff to serve the order on the defendants and file proof of service by February 24, 2022.
Judge Stewart D. Aaron said the court may decide damages based only on written submissions. A party seeking a hearing had to explain why written submissions were insufficient and identify the witnesses and evidence that would be presented.
The detailed version
- G & G Closed Circuit Events, LLC v. Batista · No. 1:21-cv-07352
- Alvin Hellerstein
- Feb. 17, 2022
What the order did
Judge Nathan referred the plaintiff’s motion for default judgment to Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron for disposition. This order did not rule on whether default judgment should be entered. Instead, it set deadlines and described how the court may later evaluate damages.
Deadlines
The defendants were ordered to file any response to the plaintiff’s motion by March 21, 2022. The plaintiff was ordered to serve a copy of the order on the defendants by February 24, 2022, and file proof of service on the docket.
Possible damages proceeding
The court notified the parties that it may conduct the damages inquest—the process of determining damages—based only on their written submissions. Any party requesting an evidentiary hearing had to explain why the inquest should not proceed in writing, identify the witnesses who would testify, and describe the evidence that would be presented.
Result
The order set response and service deadlines and established requirements for requesting a damages hearing. It did not grant or deny the motion for default judgment and did not decide the amount of damages.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.