Ramirez v. Urion Construction LLC
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:22-cv-03342
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Ramirez v. Urion Construction LLC, Judge Lehrburger ordered submissions for an inquest into plaintiffs’ damages.
The plaintiffs must prepare and file the damages materials, and the defendants may respond. The order also affects the plaintiffs’ attorneys if they seek attorneys’ fees.
What happened
In Ramirez v. Urion Construction LLC, the court directed the plaintiffs to submit proposed factual findings and legal conclusions about their damages and any other requested monetary relief. The filing must state the exact amount sought and explain how the plaintiffs calculated it.
The plaintiffs must support their submission with affidavits and documents, including an affidavit addressing personal and subject-matter jurisdiction. Any request for attorneys’ fees must include detailed time records and information supporting the requested rates. The defendants may respond by November 14, 2022.
Judge Lehrburger ordered that the damages proceeding may be decided from written submissions alone. A party seeking a hearing must explain why one is needed and identify the witnesses and evidence involved. The order sets procedures for the damages inquest but does not award a damages amount.
The detailed version
- Ramirez v. Urion Construction LLC · No. 1:22-cv-03342
- Lorna Schofield
- Sept. 23, 2022
Background
The order states that Judge Lorna G. Schofield referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger for an inquest concerning the plaintiffs’ damages. The opinion does not identify the amount of damages sought, the specific claims involved, or the defendants’ liability beyond referring to claims on which liability had been established.
Required submissions
The plaintiffs must file proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law concerning all damages and any other permitted monetary relief by October 24, 2022. Their filing must end with a concise statement of the exact dollar amount or other relief requested. The plaintiffs may rely on earlier docket filings if those filings contain the required information and are identified.
The proposed findings must connect the requested damages to the legal claims on which liability has been established and explain how the damages figure was calculated. The plaintiffs must support the findings with one or more affidavits and documentary evidence. Each proposed factual finding must cite the supporting affidavit paragraph or document page. The papers must also include an affidavit from someone with personal knowledge addressing the facts supporting personal jurisdiction over the defendant and subject-matter jurisdiction. Any allegations about liability must cite the appropriate complaint paragraphs.
Attorneys’ fees and legal memorandum
Any request for attorneys’ fees must include contemporaneous time records showing each attorney’s service dates, hours, and work performed. Counsel must also provide the attorneys’ years of bar admission, hourly rates, and information supporting the reasonableness of those rates. The legal conclusions must explain the legal basis for any fee award, including why the attorneys involved are entitled to fees. Instead of separate legal conclusions, the plaintiffs may submit a memorandum explaining the legal principles applicable to their damages claims, including any request for interest or attorneys’ fees.
Defendants’ response and hearing
The defendants must send any response to the plaintiffs’ counsel and file it with the court by November 14, 2022. The court may conduct the damages inquest solely on the parties’ written submissions. A party seeking an evidentiary hearing must explain why written submissions are insufficient and describe the witnesses and evidence that would be presented.
Disposition
Judge Robert W. Lehrburger entered an order establishing the procedures and deadlines for the damages inquest. The order did not determine a damages amount or state a final award. The opinion contains a date inconsistency: it says the referral order was dated September 23, 2023, while this order is dated and filed September 23, 2022.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.