Jamieson v. Securities America, Inc.

Background

The court considered Magistrate Judge Judith C. McCarthy’s February 22, 2022 Report and Recommendation and March 17, 2022 Supplemental Report and Recommendation. The recommendations followed the court’s reference to Judge McCarthy for an inquest—an evidentiary process to determine damages—after default judgment had been entered on liability.

Judge McCarthy recommended entering a default judgment against defendants Hector A. May and Executive Compensation Planners, Inc., for $31,632,020, plus post-judgment interest at the statutory rate beginning on the date judgment was entered. The opinion says that no party objected to the recommendations. It does not provide the underlying claims, the factual background, or the damages analysis.

Court’s review

The district court explained that it could accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. When timely, specific objections are made to dispositive recommendations, the district court must independently review the challenged portions. When there are no timely objections, the court may adopt the recommendations if the record shows no clear error. The court also stated that the same clear-error standard applies to conclusory or general objections.

Ruling

The court found no error, including no clear error, in Judge McCarthy’s recommendations. Judge Vincent L. Briccetti adopted the Report and Recommendation and Supplemental Report and Recommendation in their entirety as the opinion of the court. The court stated that it would separately enter a default judgment against Hector A. May and Executive Compensation Planners, Inc., for $31,632,020, plus post-judgment interest at the statutory rate from the date of entry of judgment. The order itself is procedural: it adopts the damages recommendation and directs entry of the default judgment rather than deciding the underlying claims on their merits.