Camacho v. The Barrier Group Inc.
- Andrew Krause
- 7:22-cv-01156
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Camacho v. The Barrier Group, Judge Krause ordered more evidence supporting damages and attorney’s fees in Camacho’s default-judgment motion.
Luis Sergio Camacho and defendants The Barrier Group Inc., Sub Enterprises Inc. doing business as Drip Drop Waterproofing, and Joel Reich.
What happened
In Camacho v. The Barrier Group Inc., Luis Sergio Camacho asked the court for a judgment by default and submitted materials supporting his requested damages and possibly attorney’s fees. The court found that the submissions did not provide enough information to support the damages calculation.
The court required Camacho to submit admissible, authenticated evidence supporting damages by October 27, 2023. If he was seeking attorney’s fees, he also had to provide documentation supporting those fees and costs. He had to serve the additional materials on the defendants that day and file proof of service.
Judge Andrew E. Krause also stated that any request for more time had to include a request to briefly postpone the November 1, 2023 hearing on the order to show cause. The order required supplemental materials but did not grant or deny the default-judgment motion.
The detailed version
- Camacho v. The Barrier Group Inc. · No. 7:22-cv-01156
- Andrew Krause
- Oct. 20, 2023
Background
Luis Sergio Camacho submitted materials supporting a motion for a default judgment against The Barrier Group Inc., Sub Enterprises Inc. doing business as Drip Drop Waterproofing, and Joel Reich. The court had reviewed submissions filed at ECF Nos. 69–72. The opinion states that the parties had exchanged discovery and were prepared to proceed to trial when the defendants’ counsel withdrew.
Damages evidence
The court held that Camacho’s submissions did not contain enough information to substantiate his damages calculation. Damages must be supported by admissible and authenticated evidence. The court explained that an attorney’s affirmation that calculates damages, without stating personal knowledge of the relevant facts or documents, is not enough. A plaintiff must provide detailed affidavits and other documentary evidence that allow the court to determine damages with reasonable certainty.
The court stated that Camacho could likely support his damages calculation with his own affidavit and potentially documentary evidence. By Friday, October 27, 2023, Camacho had to supplement his submission with admissible evidence supporting the damages calculation.
Attorney’s fees
If Camacho was seeking attorney’s fees, his counsel also had to provide appropriate documentation supporting the requested fees and costs. The court identified an affidavit stating the time spent and the basis for the hourly rate, along with adequately detailed contemporaneous time records, as examples of the required support.
Service and hearing
Camacho had to serve the additional materials on the defendants by October 27, 2023 and file proof of service on the docket. If he needed more time, he also had to request a short postponement of the November 1, 2023 hearing on the order to show cause.
Disposition
The order required Camacho to supplement the default-judgment materials with evidence supporting damages and, if requested, attorney’s fees. It did not award damages or attorney’s fees and did not state that the default-judgment motion was granted or denied. Judge Andrew E. Krause signed the order as a United States Magistrate Judge.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.