Arroyo-Bey v. Modern Orthodontics
- Analisa Torres
- 1:23-cv-03511
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Arroyo-Bey v. Modern Orthodontics, Magistrate Judge Wang ordered written submissions on default judgment and damages.
Noel Arroyo-Bey, Modern Orthodontics, and Kenneth Cooperman; the order also directed the Clerk of Court to serve the defendants.
What happened
In Arroyo-Bey v. Modern Orthodontics, Noel Arroyo-Bey asked the court to enter default judgment against Modern Orthodontics and Kenneth Cooperman.
The court did not decide that motion in this order. It required Arroyo-Bey to submit proposed factual findings, legal conclusions, and evidence supporting damages, attorney’s fees, and costs, and to serve those materials on the defendants.
Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang set February 7, 2024, for Arroyo-Bey’s submissions and February 28, 2024, for any opposition. She also said the damages review might be based only on written submissions and that any party requesting a hearing had to explain why it was needed.
The detailed version
- Arroyo-Bey v. Modern Orthodontics · No. 1:23-cv-03511
- Analisa Torres
- Jan. 10, 2024
Background
The matter was referred to Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang for a report and recommendation after Plaintiff Noel Arroyo-Bey moved for default judgment against Defendants Modern Orthodontics and Kenneth Cooperman.
Order
The court ordered Arroyo-Bey to file, by February 7, 2024, proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, along with an inquest memorandum explaining the requested damages. The damages figures had to be supported by documents or affidavits. Any request for attorney’s fees and costs also had to include supporting documentation. Arroyo-Bey had to serve these materials on the defendants and file proof of service.
The defendants could file opposition papers by February 28, 2024. The court stated that it might determine damages based solely on the parties’ written submissions. Any party requesting a hearing on damages had to make that request in its papers, explain why a hearing was necessary, and describe the additional evidence that would be presented.
Disposition
The order directed the required submissions and deadlines; it did not state that the motion for default judgment was granted or denied. The Clerk of Court was directed to serve the order on the defendants. The order was signed by Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang on January 10, 2024.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.