E.B. Stone & Son, Inc. v. Yeaman Machine Technologies, Inc.

Filing 14

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 12/8/2015 RECOMMENDING that plaintiff's 12 motion for default judgment against defendant be granted in the amount of $85,677.03. Referred to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 E.B. STONE & SON, INC., 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 v. No. 2:15-cv-1828 GEB CKD FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS YEAMAN MACHINE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Defendant. 16 17 Presently before the court is plaintiff’s motion for default judgment. This matter was 18 19 submitted without oral argument. The undersigned has fully considered the briefs and record in 20 this case and, for the reasons stated below, will recommend that plaintiff’s motion for default 21 judgment be granted. In this action, plaintiff seeks damages for breach of contract, fraud and intentional 22 23 misrepresentation, money due on an open book account, money had and received, and quantum 24 meruit – unjust enrichment. Plaintiff’s claims arise out of a contract for the sale, shipment and 25 delivery of product packaging equipment and related products to plaintiff’s manufacturing facility 26 located in Solano County, California. The record reflects that defendant was properly served with 27 process on September 9, 2015 and default was entered on November 3, 2015. Plaintiff thereafter 28 ///// 1 1 filed an application for default judgment. Plaintiff seeks an entry of default judgment in the 2 amount of $85,677.03. 3 Entry of default effects an admission of all well-pleaded allegations of the complaint by 4 the defaulted party. Geddes v. United Financial Group, 559 F.2d 557 (9th Cir. 1977). The court 5 finds the well pleaded allegations of the complaint state a claim for which relief can be granted. 6 Anderson v. Air West, 542 F.2d 1090, 1093 (9th Cir. 1976). The application for default judgment 7 and the exhibits and affidavits attached thereto also support the finding that plaintiff is entitled to 8 the relief in the form of monetary damages requested in the prayer for default judgment, which 9 does not differ in kind from the relief requested in the complaint. Henry v. Sneiders, 490 F.2d 10 315, 317 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 832 (1974). The amount sought is supported by the 11 affidavits submitted in support of the motion for default judgment. Plaintiff also requests 12 prejudgment interest, calculated under California law. Such calculation is proper in that plaintiff 13 has alleged state law claims upon which judgment may be entered. See Oak Harbor Freight 14 Lines, Inc. v. Sears Roebuck & Co., 513 F.3d 949, 961 (9th Cir. 2007). Prejudgment interest 15 should therefore be awarded. There are no policy considerations which preclude the entry of 16 default judgment of the type requested. See Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-1472 (9th Cir. 17 1986) (factors that may be considered by the court are possibility of prejudice to the plaintiff, 18 merits of plaintiff’s substantive claim, sufficiency of the complaint, sum of money at stake in the 19 action; possibility of a dispute concerning material facts; whether the default was due to 20 excusable neglect, and strong policy underlying the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure favoring 21 decisions on the merits). 22 23 24 For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that plaintiff’s motion for default judgment (ECF No. 12) against defendant be granted in the amount of $85,677.03. These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 25 assigned to this action, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen 26 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 27 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 28 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections 2 1 shall be served and filed within seven days after service of the objections. The parties 2 are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal 3 the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 4 Dated: December 8, 2015 _____________________________________ CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 5 6 7 4 ebstone1828.def 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?