Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 9, 2024

Kairos Credit Strategies Operating Partnership v. The Friars National…

Full caption

Kairos Credit Strategies Operating Partnership, LP v. The Friars National Association, Inc.

Judge
Tarnofsky
Docket
1:23-cv-02960
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedureFee Petition
In one sentence

In Kairos Credit Strategies v. The Friars National Association, Judge Tarnofsky set deadlines and evidence rules for a damages inquest after liability judgments.

Who this affects

Kairos Credit Strategies Operating Partnership, LP, Hotel Restaurant & Club Employees and Bartenders Union Local 6, Club Employees Pension Fund, the City of New York Department of Environmental Control, and the New York City Finance Administration Bureau of Compliance and Collection.

What happened

In Kairos Credit Strategies Operating Partnership, LP v. The Friars National Association, Inc., the court addressed the next steps after an earlier order found liability against two defendants and entered default judgments as to liability against two others.

The order requires Kairos to submit proposed findings explaining the damages and other monetary relief it seeks against the Union and the Fund. It sets deadlines for those submissions and for any defendant responses, and requires supporting evidence, attorney-fee records, and proof that the defaulting defendants received the papers.

The court may decide the damages issue using written submissions alone, unless a party explains why a hearing is needed. Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky issued this scheduling order for the damages inquest; the order did not set the amount of any damages.

The detailed version

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

Case
Kairos Credit Strategies Operating Partnership v. The Friars National… · No. 1:23-cv-02960
Judge
Tarnofsky
Date
Feb. 9, 2024

Background

On January 31, 2024, Judge Arun Subramanian entered a judgment as to liability in favor of Kairos Credit Strategies Operating Partnership, LP and against Hotel Restaurant & Club Employees and Bartenders Union Local 6 (the “Union”) and Club Employees Pension Fund (the “Fund”). In the same order, Judge Subramanian entered default judgments as to liability against the City of New York Department of Environmental Control and the New York City Finance Administration Bureau of Compliance and Collection (the “Defaulting Defendants”).

Judge Subramanian referred the case to a magistrate judge to conduct an inquest and issue a report and recommendation concerning the amount of damages, if any, that should be awarded against the Union and the Fund. An inquest is a court process for determining damages after liability has been established.

Court’s Order

The court ordered Kairos to file proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law by February 23, 2024. The filing must state the exact dollar amount of damages or other monetary relief sought from each defendant and the precise terms of any requested non-monetary relief.

For actual damages, Kairos must provide admissible evidence sufficient to allow the court to determine the amount with reasonable certainty. Declarations or affidavits may authenticate supporting documents. Each proposed factual finding must cite the supporting declaration paragraph or documentary page, explain how the proposed amount was calculated, and connect the damages to the legal claims against the particular defendant.

Any request for attorney’s fees must include authenticated contemporaneous time records identifying the date of service, hours worked, hourly rate when applicable, and work performed by each timekeeper. Kairos must also provide admissible evidence describing each attorney’s or timekeeper’s background and qualifications and documenting costs and expenses.

Before filing, Kairos must mail the proposed findings, supporting materials, and a copy of the order to the Defaulting Defendants at their last known addresses. Kairos must file proof of mailing. Each defendant may respond by March 8, 2024.

Disposition and Effect

The court notified the parties that it may conduct the damages inquest solely on the written submissions. A party seeking an evidentiary hearing must explain why written submissions are insufficient and identify the witnesses and evidence it would present. Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky’s order sets procedures and deadlines for deciding damages; it does not award a specific amount of damages or other relief.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.