Yousef Khraibut v. Gurbaksh Chahal et al

Filing 98

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Show Cause Response due by 3/4/2021.The Court orders Plaintiff to supplement his Motion for Default Judgment. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 2/18/2021. (crblc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/18/2021)Any non-CM/ECF Participants - Gurbaksh Chahal have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) Modified on 2/18/2021 (lsS, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

YOUSEF KHRAIBUT,

9

Plaintiff,
v.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

GURBAKSH CHAHAL, et al.,

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE
PUNITIVE DAMAGES AND
ATTORNEYS' FEES

Defendants.

12
13
14

Case No. 15-cv-04463-CRB

The Court hereby orders Plaintiff Yousef Khraibut to supplement his Motion for Default
Judgment (dkt. 90) on or before March 4, 2021, with additional information.

15

First, the Court orders Khraibut to submit a clear breakdown of his requests for

16

compensatory (economic and noneconomic) and statutory damages—by claim, by Defendant. If a

17

set of claims arises from the same conduct such that one damages award applies to the set,

18

Khraibut should explain as much. And where relevant, Khraibut should cite authority regarding

19

apportioning damages among Defendants (e.g., whether joint and several liability applies). To the

20

extent Khraibut believes Defendants should be held jointly and severally liable for the full amount

21

of compensatory, statutory, and punitive damages sought, without regard to the specific claims

22

asserted against each Defendant, Khraibut must explain his reasoning and cite relevant authority,

23

if such authority exists.1 In general, and as to each claim, the Court will not award damages based

24

on an unclear or conclusory accounting of who is liable for what.
Second, in California, a plaintiff must produce evidence of the defendant’s financial

25
26
27
28

1

If certain claims for which damages are sought apply to only one party, or if the Court concludes
that only one party is liable for a claim asserted against multiple parties, the Court is not aware of
authority that would permit the Court to hold more than one party liable for damages arising from
such claims.