Flores v. Boro Concrete Corp.
- Jesse Furman
- 1:21-cv-05006
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Flores v. Boro Concrete Corp., Judge Furman entered default damages for eight plaintiffs, denied fees, and ordered Jose Serrano Guzman to show cause.
The eight named plaintiffs who received damages obtained partial final judgments plus post-judgment interest. Attorney’s fees were not awarded. Jose Serrano Guzman was ordered to show cause why his claims should not be treated as abandoned and potentially dismissed.
What happened
In Flores v. Boro Concrete Corp., the court had already entered judgment for the plaintiffs on liability but had reserved the decisions about damages and attorney’s fees.
After reviewing the plaintiffs’ evidence, the court awarded eight plaintiffs specified damages plus post-judgment interest. It declined to award attorney’s fees because the plaintiffs did not provide documentary support. The court also ordered Jose Serrano Guzman to explain in writing by January 24, 2023, why his claims should not be treated as abandoned; otherwise, his claims would be dismissed under Rule 41.
Judge Jesse M. Furman directed the Clerk to enter partial final judgment for every plaintiff except Guzman, consistent with this order and the earlier liability order.
The detailed version
- Flores v. Boro Concrete Corp. · No. 1:21-cv-05006
- Jesse Furman
- Jan. 4, 2023
Background
The court had previously entered default judgment for the plaintiffs on liability only. It reserved the amounts of damages and any attorney’s fees until the plaintiffs submitted supporting documents. The plaintiffs later submitted evidence supporting their damages request, but they did not submit documentary support for attorney’s fees.
Damages and Fees
The court awarded the following amounts, each plus post-judgment interest:
- Jose Elmer Flores: $29,548.00 - Cesar Reyes-Argueta: $13,191.43 - Melvin Vigil Mejia: $13,191.43 - Mauricio Pereira: $30,246.14 - Hector Calero Aguilar: $55,822.86 - Jaime Mejia: $52,400.00 - Jose Benedicto Mirada Portillo: $43,829.71 - Daniel Miranda Portillo: $52,654.86
The court declined to award attorney’s fees because the plaintiffs had not provided documentary support for that request.
The court explained that it calculated the damages using the plaintiffs’ damages spreadsheet. Where the sworn affidavits differed from an earlier declaration, it treated the affidavits as controlling. Because the affidavits identified only the general months of employment, the court calculated damages using the middle of each month rather than the beginning and end of the stated employment period. It also concluded that Cesar Reyes-Argueta and Melvin Vigil Mejia were not entitled to the statutory maximums for their New York Labor Law claims because they had not worked the required number of days.
Jose Serrano Guzman
The plaintiffs’ attorneys reported that they could not reach Jose Serrano Guzman despite numerous efforts and did not submit an affidavit from him. The court ordered Guzman to show good cause in writing, no later than January 24, 2023, why his claims should not be treated as abandoned. The court stated that failure to do so would result in dismissal of his claims under Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure without further notice.
Disposition
Under Rule 54, the court found no just reason to delay entering partial final judgment. Judge Jesse M. Furman directed the Clerk to enter judgment in favor of all plaintiffs other than Jose Serrano Guzman, in accordance with this order and the earlier order establishing liability. The order did not award attorney’s fees.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.