Cawthon v. Yongchunhengyuanmaoyiyouxiangongsi

Background

On May 2, 2024, Judge Paul G. Gardephe entered default judgment against Yongchunhengyuanmaoyiyouxiangongsi and referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger for an inquest, meaning a court process to determine the plaintiff’s damages. The opinion does not identify the underlying legal claim or state that any damages amount had yet been awarded.

Required Submissions

Judge Lehrburger ordered Scott Cawthon to file proposed findings of fact and legal conclusions concerning all damages and other monetary relief allowed by the default judgment no later than May 29, 2024. The filing must state the exact dollar amount or other relief sought. It must connect the proposed damages to the legal claims for which liability had been established, explain how the requested amount was calculated, and include affidavits or documentary evidence supporting each proposed factual finding.

The plaintiff’s papers must also include an affidavit from a person with personal knowledge establishing the court’s personal jurisdiction over the defendant and subject-matter jurisdiction over the dispute. Any allegations about liability must cite the appropriate complaint paragraphs.

Attorney Fees and Legal Argument

Any request for attorney fees must include contemporaneous time records showing each attorney’s service dates, hours, and work performed. Counsel must also provide the attorneys’ years of bar admission, hourly rates, and information supporting the reasonableness of those rates. The legal conclusions must explain the legal basis for any fee request, including why the attorneys involved are entitled to fees. Instead of separate legal conclusions, the plaintiff may file a memorandum explaining the legal principles applicable to damages, interest, and attorney fees.

Defendant’s Response and Possible Hearing

The defendant was ordered to send its response, if any, to the plaintiff’s counsel and file it with the court by June 19, 2024. Judge Lehrburger stated that the damages inquest could be decided solely from written submissions. Any party seeking an evidentiary hearing had to explain why written submissions were insufficient, identify the witnesses it would call, and describe the evidence it would present.

Ruling and Service Requirements

Judge Lehrburger issued directions for completing the damages inquest; he did not determine a damages amount in this order. The order required service within three days after entry, required documents served by the plaintiff to be served within three days after filing using previously approved methods, and required the plaintiff to file proof of service within three days after service.