Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 2, 2023

Cawthon v. Cong Ty Co Phan Tap Doan Apec Viet Nam

Judge
Vernon Broderick
Docket
1:22-cv-07396
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

Cawthorn v. Cong Ty Co Phan Tap Doan Apec Viet Nam: Judge Broderick postponed deciding default judgment after Defendant contacted Plaintiff.

Who this affects

The order affects Scott Cawthorn and Cong Ty Co Phan Tap Doan Apec Viet Nam. Cawthorn must file a status update, and the corporate Defendant must use a lawyer if it appears in the case.

What happened

In Cawthorn v. Cong Ty Co Phan Tap Doan Apec Viet Nam, a hearing was held on an order requiring the parties to explain why the requested action should not be taken. Scott Cawthorn reported that a representative of the Defendant had contacted him.

The court postponed deciding Cawthorn’s motion for default judgment while awaiting further developments. Cawthorn must file a case-status update by July 7, 2023.

Judge Vernon S. Broderick also reminded the Defendant that a corporation cannot represent itself in court and must appear through a lawyer. The order did not decide the motion for default judgment.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Cawthon v. Cong Ty Co Phan Tap Doan Apec Viet Nam · No. 1:22-cv-07396
Judge
Vernon Broderick
Date
June 2, 2023

Background

The court held a hearing on an order requiring an explanation concerning the case. At the hearing, Plaintiff Scott Cawthorn reported that a representative for Defendant Cong Ty Co Phan Tap Doan Apec Viet Nam had contacted him.

Ruling

The court held Cawthorn’s motion for default judgment in abeyance, meaning it postponed a decision while waiting for further developments. Cawthorn was ordered to file a status update by July 7, 2023.

The court also reminded the Defendant that a corporation may not represent itself without a lawyer and must appear through counsel if it wishes to participate in the case. The order did not grant or deny the motion for default judgment.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.