Moonbug Entertainment Limited v. All Night Revelry Store

Background

On June 2, 2022, Judge Schofield entered a default judgment against the defendants and referred the case to Magistrate Judge James L. Cott for a damages inquest. A damages inquest is a proceeding to determine the monetary relief owed after liability has been established through a default judgment.

The order explained that a defendant’s failure to appear does not automatically establish the amount of damages. The plaintiffs still had to provide admissible evidence allowing the court to determine damages with reasonable certainty.

Required Submissions

The plaintiffs had to serve the defendants and file proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law concerning all damages and any other monetary relief permitted by the default judgment no later than June 27, 2022. Their submission had to include a concluding paragraph stating the requested monetary relief and the exact dollar amount.

The proposed findings had to connect each damages figure to the legal claims on which liability had been established, explain how the plaintiffs calculated the figures, and cite supporting affidavits or documentary evidence. Any allegations concerning liability had to cite the appropriate paragraphs of the complaint.

If the plaintiffs sought attorney’s fees, counsel had to provide contemporaneous time records identifying, for each attorney, the service date, hours worked, and work performed. Counsel also had to provide each attorney’s years of bar admission, hourly rate, and any appropriate charts concerning hours and attorneys. Any request for costs had to be supported by documentary evidence. The legal conclusions or a supporting memorandum had to explain the legal basis for requested damages, interest, attorney’s fees, and costs.

The plaintiffs also had to submit an affidavit from a person with personal knowledge addressing the facts supporting liability, the proposed damages amount, and facts establishing personal jurisdiction over the defendants and subject-matter jurisdiction.

The defendants had to file any response to the plaintiffs’ submissions by July 18, 2022.

Possible Hearing and Disposition

The court notified the parties that it might conduct the damages inquest solely from the written submissions. A party seeking an evidentiary hearing had to explain why written submissions would be insufficient, identify the witnesses who would testify, and describe the evidence that would be presented.

Judge James L. Cott therefore ordered the parties to follow the stated schedule and evidentiary requirements for the damages inquest. The order did not determine the amount of damages, attorney’s fees, costs, interest, or other monetary relief.