Bankers Standard Insruance Co. v. R.C. Complete Landscaping et al

Filing 18

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Plaintiff's motion for default judgment is granted and the court awards Plaintiff $183,465.43 in damages. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment for plaintiffs and close the case.Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 3/28/2019. (Piper, Francine)

Download PDF
Np 1 •» DISTRICT COURT E.D,N.y. CLERK'S OFFICE US UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK X . * ... q ^^ * IKOOiKLYlM ORFIICE BANKERS STANDARD INSURANCE CO., as subrogee ofRobyn Wolf-Eagle and Alan Eagle, Plaintiff, ORDER 17-CV-4415(NGG) (GRB) -againstR.C. COMPLETE LANDSCAPING and ROBERT CERPENA, Defendants. -X NICHOLAS G. GARAUFIS,United States District Judge. Plaintiff Bankers Standard Insurance Co., as subrogee ofRobyn Wolf-Eagle and Alan Eagle (the "Eagles"), alleges that "a vehicle operated by" Defendants R.C. Complete Landscaping and Robert Cerpena collided with a wall ofthe Eagles' home while Defendants performed landscaping work on or around July 30,2016, causing extensive damage to the house. (Compl.(Dkt. 1)at UK 9-11,14-18; Aif. of Michael D. O'Donnell("O'Donnell Aff.")(Dkt. 151)K 4.) Pursuant to the Eagles' insurance policy. Plaintiff paid them $183,465.43 for damages resulting from the accident. (O'Donnell Aff. K 6; s^ Damage Calculations(Dkt. 15-2).) In this case. Plaintiff seeks the same amount in damages—$183,465.43—^from Defendants. (O'Donnell Aff. If 15; Damage Calculations.) Plaintifffiled its complaint on July 26,2017. (Compl.) On March 27,2018, Plaintiff secured certificates of default as to both Defendants. (Certificate ofDefault(Dkt. 14).) Plaintiffthen moved for defaultjudgment(Mot. for Default J.("Mot.")(Dkt. 15)), and this court referred the motion to Magistrate Judge Gary R. Brown(May 21,2018 Order)for a report & recommendation("R&R"). On February 27,2019, Judge Brown issued an R&R in which he recommended that this court grant Plaintiff's motion and award Plaintiffthe damages it requests: $183,465.43. (R&R (Dkt. 16) at 2.) According to Judge Brown,the record reflects that proper service was made on Defendants,that Defendants did not file an answer or motion, and that the Clerk of Court properly entered a notation of default pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55. (R&R at 1.) He found that Defendants' defaults "constitute 'an admission of all well-pleaded allegations'" against them and that Plaintiff has demonstrated that its allegations establish a subrogation claim against Defendants for property damage to the Eagles' home. (Id.(quoting Vermont Teddv Bear Co. v. 1-800 BEARGRAM Co.. 373 F.3d 241,246(2d Cir. 2004)).) He further found that Plaintiff had established through documentary evidence, including.invoices for repairs to Plaintiffs home and checks issued by Plaintiff, that it is entitled to $182,448.48 for repairs-of-property costs and $1,016.95 for initial mitigation and board-up costs, for a total of $183,465.43. (Id. at 1-2(citing Transatlantic Marine Claims Agencv.Inc. v. Ace Shipping Corp.. 109F.3d 105, 111 (2dCir. 1997)).) No party has objected to the R&R and the time in which to do so has passed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). The court therefore reviews the R&R for clear error. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72,1983 Advisory Committee's Notes; s^ Colvin v. Berrvhill. 734 F. App'x 756,758 ^(2d Cir. 2018) (summary order); Wider v. Colvin,245 F. Supp. 3d 381, 385(E.D.N.Y. 2017). Finding no clear error in the R&R,the court ADOPTS the R&R(Dkt. 16)in full. Accordingly,Plaintiffs motion for defaultjudgment(Dkt. 15)is GRANTED and the court awards Plaintiff$183,465.43 in damages. The Clerk of Court is respectfully DIRECTED to enter judgment for Plaintiffs and close this case. SO ORDERED. s/Nicholas Garaufis Dated: Brooklyn, New York March-?^ 2019 NICHOLAS G. GARAXTFIS United States District Juage

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?