Gustavia Home, LLC v. Saagber et al
ADOPTION ORDER - The R&R is adopted in its entirety. The Plaintiff is directed to file an amended proposed judgment of foreclosure and sale consistent with the R&R, and to choose a referee for the foreclosure and sale. SEE ATTACHED ORDER for details. So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 6/21/2017. (Coleman, Laurie)
3:07 pm, Jun 21, 2017
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
LONG ISLAND OFFICE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------------GUSTAVIA HOME, LLC,
-againstCANDIDA SAAGBER a/k/a Candida M.
Saagber, COUNTY OF NASSAU
c/o Office of Housing and Intergovernmental
Affairs, JOHN DOE 1 THROUGH 12
said persons or parties having or claimed to
have a right, title or interest in the mortgaged
premises herein, their respective names are
presently unknown to Plaintiff,
The Margolin & Weinreb Law Group, LLP
Attorneys for the Plaintiff
165 Eileen Way, Suite 101
Syosset, NY 11791
Alan H Weinreb, Esq.
Randy J. Schaefer, Esq., Of Counsel
Candida Saagber, County of Nassau
SPATT, District Judge.
On April 28, 2016, the Plaintiff Gustavia Home, LLC (the “Plaintiff”) commenced this
foreclosure action against the Defendants Candida Saagber (the “ Defendant Saagber”), County
of Nassau (the “Defendant Nassau”), and John Does 1 through 12.
On August 15, 2016, the Clerk of the Court noted the default of the Defendants Saagber
On November 15, 2016, the Plaintiff moved for a default judgment against the
On November 16, 2016, the Court referred the Plaintiff’s motion to United States
Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke for a recommendation as to whether the default judgment
should be granted and, if so, whether damages should be awarded.
On June 2, 2017, Judge Locke issued a report (the “R&R”) recommending that the
Plaintiffs be awarded a total of $124,959.07, per diem pre-judgment interest in the amount of
$18.16 per day until judgment is entered, post-judgment interest pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a),
and that Plaintiff be granted leave to renew its application for late fees. The R&R further
recommended that the Court enter an order for judgment of foreclosure and sale; that a referee be
appointed to effectuate the sale; and that the caption be amended to remove John Does 1 through
12. The Plaintiff filed proof of service on June 2, 2017.
It has been more than fourteen days since the service of the R&R, and the parties have
not filed objections.
As such, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, this
Court has reviewed the R&R for clear error, and finding none, now concurs in both its reasoning
and its result. See Coburn v. P.N. Fin., No. 13-CV-1006 (ADS) (SIL), 2015 WL 520346, at *1
(E.D.N.Y. Feb. 9, 2015) (reviewing Report and Recommendation without objections for clear
Accordingly, the R&R is adopted in its entirety. The Plaintiff is directed to file an
amended proposed judgment of foreclosure and sale consistent with the R&R, and to choose a
referee for the foreclosure and sale.
Dated: Central Islip, New York
June 21, 2017
_/s/ Arthur D. Spatt_
ARTHUR D. SPATT
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?