Gao v. Savour Sichuan Inc.
- John Cronan
- 1:19-cv-02515
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Gao v. Savour Sichuan Inc., Judge Cronan denied Gao’s default-judgment motions without prejudice and ordered additional notice and a conference.
Plaintiff Xiao Chun Gao and Defendants La Vie En Szechuan Restaurant Corporation and Yi Zhang. The order denied Gao’s default-judgment motions without prejudice and imposed notice and conference requirements before any renewed default-judgment proceedings.
What happened
In Gao v. Savour Sichuan Inc., Plaintiff Xiao Chun Gao asked the court to enter default judgment against La Vie En Szechuan Restaurant Corporation and Yi Zhang. Neither defendant attended the May 1, 2024 conference, and neither had participated in the case since their lawyer withdrew in November 2020.
La Vie had not answered the latest complaint, while Zhang had answered an earlier complaint but had not been served with later versions. The court also found that Gao’s motions did not comply with the court’s local requirements for default-judgment motions and was concerned that the defendants had not received adequate notice of the case’s progress.
Judge John P. Cronan denied the motions without prejudice to renewal. He ordered La Vie and Zhang to appear at a May 22, 2024 telephone conference, directed Gao to send them specified case materials by mail and email, and said Gao could restart the default-judgment process if they failed to appear.
The detailed version
- Gao v. Savour Sichuan Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-02515
- John Cronan
- May 2, 2024
Background
The court held a conference on Plaintiff Xiao Chun Gao’s motions seeking default judgment against Defendants La Vie En Szechuan Restaurant Corporation (identified as “La Vie”) and Yi Zhang. Neither defendant attended. The court noted that neither had appeared or participated in the action since November 2020, when their defense lawyer was allowed to withdraw. The lawyer had represented that efforts to coordinate the representation of Zhang and La Vie had been met with a lack of cooperation and that Zhang had stopped paying for legal services.
Gao served the operative Third Amended Complaint on La Vie on April 26, 2021, making La Vie’s answer due May 17, 2021. La Vie did not answer, and the Clerk of Court issued a Certificate of Default against it on March 8, 2024. Zhang had answered the First Amended Complaint, but Gao had not served Zhang with later versions of the complaint. The court also stated that neither defendant appeared to have received most of Gao’s filings since November 2020, except for the recent default-judgment motion.
Ruling
The court found that both default-judgment motions failed to comply with Local Civil Rule 55.2, which governs such motions. Because of that procedural noncompliance, the unusual posture of the case, and concerns about whether the defendants had adequate notice, the court denied Gao’s motions without prejudice to renewal. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motions at Docket Numbers 195 and 198.
Further Proceedings and Notice
The court ordered La Vie and Zhang to appear at a telephone conference on May 22, 2024, to state whether they intended to defend the action. It noted that La Vie, as a corporation, could appear only through counsel. The court stated that if Zhang and/or La Vie failed to appear, it would grant Gao permission to restart the default-judgment proceedings.
The court directed Gao to send the order, the court’s Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and the Judgment to La Vie and Zhang by overnight courier at the specified address, and to send the same materials to Zhang at the specified residence. Gao was also directed to email the materials to the specified email address while copying the judge’s chambers, and to file proof of service by May 3, 2024.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.