Ixcoy Perez v. Mechanical Service Corp. of New York
- Ona Wang
- 1:21-cv-02467
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Ixcoy Perez v. Mechanical Service Corp., Judge Wang set procedures for deciding damages after defendants’ default.
The plaintiffs had to submit and serve evidence supporting damages, attorney’s fees, and costs. The defaulting defendants could oppose those submissions or request a damages hearing. The order did not determine the monetary amounts owed.
What happened
Ixcoy Perez v. Mechanical Service Corp. concerns the next steps after the defendants defaulted. The court required the plaintiffs to submit proposed factual findings, legal conclusions, and evidence supporting their damages, attorney’s fees, and costs.
The plaintiffs had to serve those materials on the defaulting defendants and file proof of service. The defendants could file opposition papers. The court said it might decide the damages issue using written submissions alone, but any party seeking a hearing had to explain why one was needed and identify the additional evidence it would present.
Judge Ona T. Wang ordered the plaintiffs to submit the required materials by December 16, 2022, and to serve the order and file proof of service by November 30, 2022. The order did not determine the amount of damages, fees, or costs.
The detailed version
- Ixcoy Perez v. Mechanical Service Corp. of New York · No. 1:21-cv-02467
- Ona Wang
- Nov. 17, 2022
Background
The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang for an inquest after a default by the defendants. An inquest is a court process for determining the amount of damages and related monetary relief after a defendant has not defended the case.
Order
The court ordered the plaintiffs to file, by December 16, 2022:
- proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law; and - an inquest memorandum explaining and supporting their claimed damages.
The proposed damages had to be supported by documents and/or affidavits establishing the requested amounts. The plaintiffs also had to provide documentation supporting any requested attorney’s fees and costs.
The plaintiffs were required to serve these materials on the defaulting defendants, as identified in ECF 52, and file proof of service on the docket by December 16, 2022. They also had to serve a copy of the order on the defaulting defendants and file proof of that service by November 30, 2022.
The defendants could file opposition papers by January 13, 2023. The court notified the parties that it might conduct the inquest solely through written submissions. A party requesting an evidentiary hearing on damages had to make that request in its filing, explain why a hearing was necessary, and describe the additional evidence that would be presented.
Disposition and effect
The order established the schedule and evidentiary requirements for the damages inquest. It did not award or set any amount of damages, attorney’s fees, or costs.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.