Chance v. Karmacharya et al
ORDER: For the reasons stated in the attached ruling, the Court DENIES plaintiff's motion for reconsideration (Doc. # 20 ). The Clerk of Court shall enter final judgment in plaintiff's favor on his Title VII claim of race discrimination in the amount of $1.00 against each defendant. The Clerk of Court shall thereafter close this case. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 4/24/2017. (Townsend, D.)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
JITENDRA KARMACHARYA and
CIVIL NO. 3:14-cv-01111 (JAM)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND GRANTING DEFAULT
JUDGMENT AND AWARD OF NOMINAL DAMAGES
On March 20, 2017, the Court entered an order granting in part and denying in part
plaintiff’s motion for default judgment and ordered plaintiff to submit evidence to substantiate
his claim of damages as to his claim of race discrimination within 30 days. Doc. #19. The
Court’s order stated in part that “[p]laintiff is advised that failure to submit evidence of damages
within 30 days may result in the Court's entry of final judgment without an award of damages.”
Doc. #19 at 5. Rather than comply with the Court’s order and submit evidence of actual
damages, plaintiff has untimely filed a one-page motion for reconsideration. See Doc. #20; D.
Conn. L. Civ. R. 7(c) (requiring motion for reconsideration to be filed within seven days of the
decision from which relief is sought).
I will deny the motion for reconsideration and enter final judgment for nominal damages
only. First, plaintiff’s motion seeks reconsideration of the Court’s order with respect to plaintiff’s
disability claim, citing a hearsay statement by an unnamed employee of defendant’s from a
police report that plaintiff is “mentally challenged and is not all there.” Doc. #20 at 1. The Court
has considered this additional evidence and concludes that it does not alter the Court's conclusion
with respect to plaintiff's failure to substantiate his claim of disability.
Second, plaintiff states that “[a]s for the claim for damages since the defendants did not
answer the complaint, [t]he amount requested serves as the amount to be rewarded.” Doc. #20 at
1. But as the Court stated in its prior ruling, the Court may not simply award damages for the
amount stated by plaintiff in his complaint ($8 million) in the absence of evidence of damages.
Doc. #19 at 4. Because plaintiff has elected not to adduce evidence of actual damages, the Court
will award nominal damages of $1 against each defendant. See, e.g., Rainey v. Diamond State
Port Corp., 354 Fed. Appx. 722 (3d Cir. 2009) (per curiam); Peterson v. Syracuse Police Dept.,
2014 WL 803931 (E.D.N.Y. 2014).
For the reasons stated above, the Court DENIES plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration
(Doc. #20). The Clerk of Court shall enter final judgment in plaintiff’s favor on his Title VII
claim of race discrimination in the amount of $1.00 against each defendant. The Clerk of Court
shall thereafter close this case.
It is so ordered.
Dated at New Haven, Connecticut this 24th day of April 2017.
/s/ Jeffrey Alker Meyer
Jeffrey Alker Meyer
United States District Judge
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?