US Foods, Inc. v. Reed et al

Filing 18

DEFAULT JUDGMENT granting 16 Motion for Default Judgment. See Order for details. Signed by Chief District Judge Julie A Robinson on 04/04/2018. (tvn)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
U.S. FOODS, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 17-CV-02409-JAR-GEB

DERRICK S. REED; HORIZONS LLC;
HORIZONS BURGERS LLC d/b/a
HORIZONS HAMBURGERS PALACE;
AND MC J’S, INC. d/b/a REED’S
RINGSIDE SPORTS BAR,
Defendants.

DEFAULT JUDGMENT
Plaintiff U.S. Foods, Inc. brings this suit to recover amounts and reimbursements owed
by Defendants Derrick S. Reed, Horizons LLC, Horizons Burgers LLC (d/b/a/ Horizons
Hamburgers Palace), and MC J’s, Inc. (d/b/a/ Reed’s Ringside Sports Bar) pursuant to a contract
between the parties under which Plaintiff supplied Defendants with various food and foodrelated products. Now before the Court is Plaintiff’s Amended Motion for Default Judgment
(Sum Certain) (Doc. 16). Defendants have failed to appear in this case and to respond to
Plaintiff’s motion.1 The Court has thoroughly reviewed Plaintiff’s motion and the
documentation submitted in support thereof, and is prepared to rule. For the reasons set forth
below, Plaintiff’s motion is granted, but Plaintiff is not awarded the full relief it seeks.

1

Both Plaintiff and the Court have been mailing pleadings and orders in this case to Defendants at the
address where they were served with process. See Docs. 3–6. Additionally, the Court has attempted to send its
orders to an additional address on file for Defendants. All of the Court’s mailings have been returned as unclaimed.
See Docs. 14–15, 17.

On October 31, 2017, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Default Judgment (Sum Certain)2
against Defendants, who failed to appear or oppose Plaintiff’s motion. A Clerk’s Entry of
Default against Defendants was filed on November 21, 2017.3
In an order dated November 22, 2017,4 the Court initially agreed with Plaintiff that the
contractual amount owed by Defendants would be appropriate for a sum certain entry of default
under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(1), but required Plaintiff to provide supporting documentation for its
attorneys’ fees and costs in the form of billing records, which Plaintiff filed under seal on
December 8, 2017.5 Upon further consideration, however, the Court determined that Plaintiff’s
motion for default judgment failed to appropriately document the damages sought. The Court
requested, by email to Plaintiff’s counsel, that Plaintiff provide documentation to support its
calculation of the pro-rated incentive reimbursement amount owed by Defendants, the amount of
unpaid invoices, and the interest calculation. The Court stated that after receiving the appropriate
supporting documentation, it would conduct a telephonic hearing during which Plaintiff’s
counsel could further clarify the amounts sought. The Court advised that it expected Plaintiff’s
counsel to mitigate attorneys’ fees associated with compiling the additional supporting
documentation and the telephonic hearing.
In a January 8, 2018 email to chambers providing the requested documentation,
Plaintiff’s counsel indicated that the amounts set forth in Plaintiff’s initial motion for default
judgment and in the supporting affidavits were inaccurate. The Court therefore denied Plaintiff’s
motion for default judgment without prejudice in an order dated January 10, 2018, and cautioned

2

Doc. 7.

3

Doc. 8.

4

Doc. 9.

5

Doc. 12.

2

Plaintiff that any amended motion should be accompanied by the appropriate documentation to
support the amounts claimed as of the date of Plaintiff’s original motion for default judgment.6
Thus, the Court expected any amended motion to seek an amount no greater than what Plaintiff
would have been entitled to had its October 31, 2017 motion for default judgment been
accompanied by the appropriate documentation.
In its amended motion, Plaintiff seeks a default judgment in the amount of $193,254.09,
which includes: (1) $55,524.70 in amounts past due on invoices; (2) $102,836.57 for a pro-rated
incentive reimbursement under the parties’ contract; (3) $26,129.62 in pre-judgment interest at a
rate of 1.5% per month from April 2017 through February 2018; and (4) $8,763.20 in attorneys’
fees and costs through October 30, 2017. Plaintiff also seeks post-judgment interest at a rate of
1.5% per month.
Plaintiff has provided sufficient documentation to support that it is owed a pro-rated
incentive reimbursement of $102,836.57. However, although Plaintiff seeks past-due amounts
owing of $55,524.70, Plaintiff has submitted invoices sufficient to support only $37,506.79. It
appears that Plaintiff has included in the total of invoices past due the amounts of two large
checks ($8,000 and $9,875) that Defendant wrote to Plaintiff but that could not be cashed due to
insufficient funds.7 It is unclear which invoices these checks were intended to cover and whether
those invoices are among those submitted in support of Plaintiff’s amended motion—which
would result in the default judgment amount including the same charges twice. Plaintiff’s
recovery for past-due invoices will therefore be limited to $37,506.79.8

6

Doc. 13 at 2.

7

Doc. 16-2 at 108–110.

8
This amount includes $50 in fees for checks written without sufficient funds, but excludes $132.16 in
undocumented “service fees.”

3

Further, Plaintiff seeks pre-judgment interest at a rate of 1.5% per month, which is the
prejudgment interest rate permitted by the parties’ contract.9 However, Plaintiff seeks
prejudgment interest from April 2017 through February 2018, despite the Court having ordered
that Plaintiff’s recovery would be limited to amounts claimed as of the date of its original motion
for default judgment. That motion was filed on October 31, 2017 and, therefore, Plaintiff is
awarded pre-judgment interest at 1.5% per month from April 2017 through October 2017 in the
amount of $14,736.05.
Plaintiff has properly limited its request for attorneys’ fees and costs to the amount
incurred up to October 30, 2017, when counsel completed preparation of Plaintiff’s original
motion for default judgment. Plaintiff is therefore awarded $8,763.20 in attorneys’ fees and
costs pursuant to the terms of the parties’ contract.10
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COURT that Plaintiff’s Motion for Default
Judgment (Sum Certain) (Doc. 7) is granted and Plaintiff is awarded judgment in the total
amount of $163,842.61, which consists of a pro-rated incentive reimbursement of $102,836.57,
past-due invoices in the amount of $37,506.79, pre-judgment interest of $14,736.05, and
attorney’s fees and costs of $8,763.20. Plaintiff is also awarded post-judgment interest at a rate
of 1.5% per month.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 4, 2018
S/ Julie A. Robinson
JULIE A. ROBINSON
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

9

Doc. 1-1 at 4.

10

Id.

4