Johnson v. Reece

Background

The court considered an inquest into damages—the process of determining the amount of money to award after liability had been established. The matter had been referred to Magistrate Judge Wang, who issued a Report and Recommendation on April 10, 2024.

The Report and Recommendation advised the parties that they had 14 days after service to file objections and warned that failing to object on time would waive the right to object. Plaintiff filed proof showing that the recommendation was served on Defendant at his last known address on May 2, 2024. Defendant did not file objections or request an extension by the time of the order.

Recommended damages

Magistrate Judge Wang recommended that Plaintiff receive:

- $185,000 in compensatory damages; - $21,667.80 in pre-judgment interest; and - post-judgment interest under state and federal law from July 20, 2023, until the judgment is paid.

Court’s ruling

The district court explained that it could accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge’s recommendations. Because Defendant filed no timely objections, the court concluded that he waived the right to object to the recommendation or obtain appellate review. The court nevertheless reviewed the petition and Report and Recommendation and found them well reasoned and supported by the facts and law.

Judge Margaret M. Garnett adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case. The order does not separately state that a judgment was entered or use the terms “with prejudice” or “without prejudice.”