Johnson v. Reece
- Garnett
- 1:22-cv-09601
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Johnson v. Reece, Judge Garnett ordered Javon Johnson to serve the damages recommendation on Kenneth Reece and file proof of service.
Javon Johnson and Kenneth Reece; the order assigns Johnson service and filing duties and gives Reece notice of the Report and Recommendation.
What happened
In Johnson v. Reece, the court had previously entered a default judgment against Kenneth Reece on responsibility for the claims and sent the question of damages to Magistrate Judge Wang. Judge Wang recommended an award of damages and interest.
The court ordered Javon Johnson to serve that recommendation and the order on Kenneth Reece within two business days, using certified mail or another method that proves delivery. Johnson must file proof of service within two business days after serving Reece, or file existing proof by the same deadline if service already occurred.
Judge Margaret M. Garnett also explained that a party generally has 14 days after receiving the recommendation to file specific written objections, and that failing to do so waives further court and appellate review. This order did not state a final damages award.
The detailed version
- Johnson v. Reece · No. 1:22-cv-09601
- Garnett
- Apr. 30, 2024
Background
On July 20, 2023, the court granted Javon Johnson a default judgment against Kenneth Reece on liability. The court then referred the damages issue to Magistrate Judge Wang for an inquest, meaning a proceeding to determine the amount of damages. On April 10, 2024, Judge Wang issued a Report and Recommendation recommending damages, prejudgment interest, and post-judgment interest.
Order
The order directs Johnson to serve Reece with the Report and Recommendation and a copy of this order within two business days of April 30, 2024. Service must be by certified mail or another method that provides proof of delivery. Johnson must file proof of service on the docket within two business days after service. If service had already occurred, Johnson was required to file proof of that service by the same deadline.
The court explained that a party may file specific written objections to the Report and Recommendation within 14 days after being served. It further stated that failure to file timely objections waives further judicial review by the District Court and on appeal. The order itself does not adopt the recommended damages or state a final damages amount.
Disposition
The court issued an order requiring service and proof of service. Judge Margaret M. Garnett did not state a final damages award in this order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.