RLS DISTRIBUTION v. STEPHEN SMALL et al

Filing 12

OPINION FILED. Signed by Judge Renee Marie Bumb on 12/21/16. (js)

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

[Docket No. 11]

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
CAMDEN VICINAGE

RLS DISTRIBUTION, INC. d/b/a
RLS LOGISTICS,

Civil No. 16-3714 (RMB/JS)

Plaintiff,

OPINION

v.
STEPHEN SMALL d/b/a SMALL
TRANSPORTATION, LLC,
Defendant.

APPEARANCES:
Jim H. Fields, Jr., Esq.
William J. Ferren & Associates
10 Sentry Parkway, Suite 301
Blue Bell, PA 19422
Attorney for Plaintiff RLS Distribution, Inc.
d/b/a RLS Logistics

BUMB, United States District Judge:
This matter comes before the Court upon the Motion to
Enforce Judgment by Plaintiff RLS Distribution, Inc. d/b/a
RLS Logistics (the “Plaintiff”), wherein Plaintiff submits
“documentation in support of its claim for damages relative to
Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment against Defendant
Stephen Small d/b/a Small Transportation, LLC” (“Defendant
Small”) [Docket No. 11].

On November 8, 2016, this Court

granted Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment against

1

Defendant Small as to liability only and, at Plaintiff’s
request, permitted Plaintiff an opportunity to submit additional
documentation and information in support of its request for
damages [Docket Nos. 8, 9].

The instant motion followed.

As the Court stated in its November 8, 2016 Opinion, “[a]
default is not an admission of the amount of damages claimed.”
Operative Plasterers & Cement Masons Int’l Ass’n Local No. 8 v.
Specialty Stucco Restoration, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92460, at *7
(D.N.J. Dec. 20, 2006) (citation omitted).

A court may, in its

discretion, conduct a hearing to ascertain the amount of damages
owed to the plaintiff.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2).

“However, the

Court is not required to conduct such hearings ‘as long as it
ensures that there is a basis for the damages specified in the
default judgment.’”

Doe v. Simone, 2013 WL 3772532, at *3

(D.N.J. July 17, 2013) (quoting Trucking Employees of N. Jersey
Welfare Fund, Inc.-Pension Fund v. Caliber Auto Transfer, Inc.,
2009 WL 3584358, at *3 (D.N.J. Oct. 27, 2009)); see also
Moroccanoil, Inc. v. JMG Freight Grp. LLC, 2015 WL 6673839,
at *2 (D.N.J. Oct. 30, 2015) (finding that plaintiff “provided
adequate proof of the damages at issue here,” where plaintiff
provided a sworn certification and sale and shipping order).
Here, Plaintiff has provided the Court with ample
documentation in support of its request for damages in the
amount of $103,434.12.

First, Plaintiff submits the sworn

2

affidavit of Megan Muth, a claim professional employed by
Travelers Property Casualty Company of America, Plaintiff’s
property insurer.

Muth Aff. [Docket No. 11-2].

Ms. Muth

performed the adjustment of the loss and calculated the amount
of damage to the food product at issue to be $103,434.12.
Muth Aff. ¶¶ 4, 8.

Plaintiff also submits the Statement of Loss

prepared by its insurer, reflecting a loss of $103,434.12.
Muth Aff. Ex. A [Docket No. 11-4].

Additionally, Plaintiff has

provided the Court with correspondence between Plaintiff and its
vendors regarding the food product damaged.
[Docket Nos. 11-6 to 11-14].

Muth Aff. Exs. C-K

The Court finds this documentation

to be sufficient to prove the amount of damages at issue in this
case and that no hearing is necessary.
Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s request
for damages in the amount of $103,434.12 will be granted.
appropriate Order shall issue on this date.

s/Renée Marie Bumb_
RENÉE MARIE BUMB
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: December 21, 2016

3

An