Garcia v. Rebecca Minkoff LLC

Background

The Clerk of Court entered a certificate of default against Rebecca Minkoff LLC. The District Judge later entered a default against that defendant and referred the action to Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses to conduct an inquest—an examination—and issue a report and recommendation concerning Victoria N. Garcia’s damages.

Order

The order required Garcia to file proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law by August 3, 2023. The filing had to state the exact amount of damages or other monetary relief sought and describe any requested non-monetary relief.

For actual damages, Garcia had to provide admissible evidence sufficient to allow the court to determine the amount with reasonable certainty. Supporting declarations or affidavits could authenticate necessary documents. Each proposed factual finding had to cite the supporting declaration or documentary evidence and explain how the requested amount was calculated and connected to the claims against Rebecca Minkoff LLC.

Before awarding damages or entering judgment, the court stated that it had to be satisfied that it had personal jurisdiction over Rebecca Minkoff LLC, that service was adequate, and that it had subject-matter jurisdiction over the case. The order warned that inadequate proof of service could result in denial of Garcia’s request for a damages judgment. The court also had to determine whether the complaint’s well-pleaded allegations, which are treated as true after default, were legally sufficient to establish liability on each claim.

Any request for attorney’s fees had to include authenticated, contemporaneous time records, information about each timekeeper’s work and qualifications, and documentation of costs and expenses. Garcia could submit a legal memorandum instead of separate conclusions of law.

Garcia had to mail the proposed findings, supporting materials, and the order to Rebecca Minkoff LLC at its last known address and file proof of mailing. Rebecca Minkoff LLC could serve and file responses by August 17, 2023. Judge Moses stated that the inquest might be conducted using written submissions alone, but the court could schedule an evidentiary hearing. A party seeking a hearing had to explain why written submissions were insufficient and identify the witnesses and evidence it would present.

Disposition and Significance

This order set procedures for deciding damages and related relief after a default. It did not determine liability, award a specific amount, or enter a damages judgment. The classification is procedural because the order addressed the process for a default-related damages inquest rather than deciding the underlying claims on their merits.