Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 19, 2022

Nestor Victor v. Sams Deli Grocery Corp.

Judge
Sarah Cave
Docket
1:19-cv-02965-SLC
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureEmployment
In one sentence

In Nestor Victor v. Sam’s Deli Grocery, Magistrate Judge Cave ordered defendants to respond to Victor’s request for default judgment.

Who this affects

Pastor Nestor Victor, Sam’s Deli Grocery Corp. doing business as Sam’s Deli, and Walid Mohamed Siedi.

What happened

In Nestor Victor v. Sam’s Deli Grocery Corp., Pastor Nestor Victor asked for default judgment against Sam’s Deli Grocery Corp. and Walid Mohamed Siedi. He sought $172,897.75 for alleged unpaid minimum wages, overtime, statutory damages, and liquidated damages, plus $16,722.40 in attorneys’ fees and costs.

The court ordered the defendants to respond by May 20, 2022. The order said that if they did not respond or contact the judge’s chambers by that date to request an in-court hearing, the court intended to prepare a recommendation about the motion and damages using Victor’s written submissions without holding a hearing.

Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave did not decide the default-judgment motion in this order. She also directed Victor to serve the order on the defendants and file proof of service by April 22, 2022.

The detailed version

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

Case
Nestor Victor v. Sams Deli Grocery Corp. · No. 1:19-cv-02965-SLC
Judge
Sarah Cave
Date
Apr. 19, 2022

Background

Pastor Nestor Victor filed a motion for default judgment against Sam’s Deli Grocery Corp., doing business as Sam’s Deli, and Walid Mohamed Siedi. A default judgment is a judgment requested when a party has not defended the case. Victor sought $172,897.75 for alleged failures to pay the minimum wage and overtime compensation, along with statutory damages and liquidated damages. He also requested $16,722.40 in attorneys’ fees and costs.

Order

The court ordered the defendants to submit any response to Victor’s motion by May 20, 2022. The order further stated that if the defendants failed to respond or failed to contact the judge’s chambers by that date to request an in-court hearing, the court intended to issue a report and recommendation concerning the motion and damages based only on Victor’s written submissions and without an in-court hearing.

Victor was ordered to serve the order on the defendants and file proof of service by April 22, 2022.

Disposition

Judge Sarah L. Cave did not grant or deny the default-judgment motion in this order. The order set a response deadline and explained the next procedural step if the defendants did not respond.

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.