Onewest Bank, N.A. v. Cole et al
MEMORANDUM & ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The Court adopts the MJ Reyes' Report & Recommendation 38 dated 4/17/15 without de novo review, and directs the Clerk to enter judgment against defendant Paul Cole in the total amount of $543,988.36. See the Report and Recomendation for other relief which is affirmed by the Memorandum and Order. A copy of this Memorandum and Order will be mailed to the pro se defendant Paul Cole by regular mail from chambers. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 7/17/2015. (Innelli, Michael) Modified on 7/17/2015 (Innelli, Michael).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
ONEWEST BANK, N.A.,
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
14-CV-03078 (FB) (RER)
PAUL COLE, et al.,
For the Plaintiff:
KEITH YOUNG, ESQ.
1775 Wehrle Drive, Suite 100
Williamsville, NY 14221
BLOCK, Senior District Judge:
On April 17, 2015, Magistrate Judge Reyes issued a Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) recommending that the Court enter default judgment
against defendant Paul Cole in the amount of $541,147.56, which consists of: (1)
$538,704.56 in unpaid principal, interest accrued through April 1, 2015, preacceleration late charges, insurance and tax disbursements, and amounts spent on
property inspections and a broker price opinion report/appraisal fee, as well as (2)
$2,878.00 in costs and fees. R&R at 5,8. The R&R further recommends that the Court:
(1) order the foreclosure and sale of the subject property located at 187-05 Quencer
Road, Saint Albans, New York, (2) appoint Stephanie S. Goldstone as a referee to
conduct the sale of the property, and (3) deny plaintiffs’ request for attorney’s fees. Id.
at 5-7. The R&R provided that failure to object within fourteen days of receipt would
preclude appellate review. Id. at 8. Defendants were served a copy of the R&R by mail
on June 11, 2015. To date, no objections have been filed.
If clear notice has been given of the consequences of the failure to object, and
there are no objections, the Court may adopt the R&R without de novo review. See
Mario v. P & C Food Mkts., Inc., 313 F.3d 758, 766 (2d Cir. 2002) (“Where parties
receive clear notice of the consequences, failure to timely to object to a magistrate’s
report and recommendation operates as a waiver of further judicial review of the
magistrate’s decision.”). The Court will excuse the failure to object and conduct de
novo review if it appears that the magistrate judge may have committed plain error. See
Spence v. Superintendent, Great Meadow Corr. Facility, 219 F.3d 162, 174 (2d Cir.
2000). No such error appears here. However, the interest calculation must be updated
to account for the passage of time since the R&R was issued. From the date of the
R&R to the date of this Order, the total amount of interest accrued is $2,840.80.
Accordingly, the Court adopts the R&R without de novo review, and directs the Clerk
to enter judgment against defendant Paul Cole in the total amount of $543,988.36.
/S/ Frederic Block
Senior United States District Judge
Brooklyn, New York
July 17, 2015
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?