King et al v. Wang et al

Filing 337

ORDER: The Court will hold a hearing, pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 104, on December 7, 2021, at 9:00 a.m., regarding the admissibility of the Artron and Artnet records. At that hearing, the Court will also hear argument on the motion fo r reconsideration of the Court's Order at Dkt. No. 321 precluding the recovery of disgorgement for Plaintiff's violation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 and for insufficient notice. The parties should be prepared to address wheth er, notwithstanding the failure to request disgorgement in the complaint, Defendants had sufficient notice that Plaintiffs could seek to recover disgorgement and present arguments and evidence about unjust enrichment. See, e.g., Dkt. No. 36 4, 7, 110, 130; see also Powell v. Nat'l Bd. of Med. Examiners, 364 F.3d 79, 86 (2d Cir.), opinion corrected, 511 F.3d 238 (2d Cir. 2004) ("Under Rule 54(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a court can grant any relief to which a pre vailing party is entitled, whether or not that relief was expressly sought in the complaint. The sole exception to this rule is where a court grants relief not requested and of which the opposing party has no notice, thereby prejudicing that party . In such case, unasked for relief should not be granted." (internal citations omitted)). No further submissions will be entertained prior to the hearing. SO ORDERED.( Status Conference set for 12/7/2021 at 09:00 AM before Judge Lewis J. Liman.) (Signed by Judge Lewis J. Liman on 11/23/2021) (va)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
---------------------------------------------------------------------- X
:
YIEN-KOO KING,
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
-v:
:
ANDREW WANG, et al.,
:
:
Defendants.
:
:
---------------------------------------------------------------------- X

11/23/2021

14-cv-7694 (LJL)
ORDER

LEWIS J. LIMAN, United States District Judge:
The Court will hold a hearing, pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 104, on December 7,
2021, at 9:00 a.m., regarding the admissibility of the Artron and Artnet records.
At that hearing, the Court will also hear argument on the motion for reconsideration of
the Court’s Order at Dkt. No. 321 precluding the recovery of disgorgement for Plaintiff’s
violation of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 and for insufficient notice. The parties should be
prepared to address whether, notwithstanding the failure to request disgorgement in the
complaint, Defendants had sufficient notice that Plaintiffs could seek to recover disgorgement
and present arguments and evidence about unjust enrichment. See, e.g., Dkt. No. 36 ¶¶ 4, 7, 110,
130; see also Powell v. Nat’l Bd. of Med. Examiners, 364 F.3d 79, 86 (2d Cir.), opinion
corrected, 511 F.3d 238 (2d Cir. 2004) (“Under Rule 54(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, a court can grant any relief to which a prevailing party is entitled, whether or not that
relief was expressly sought in the complaint. The sole exception to this rule is where a court
grants relief not requested and of which the opposing party has no notice, thereby prejudicing
that party. In such case, unasked for relief should not be granted.” (internal citations omitted)).
No further submissions will be entertained prior to the hearing.
SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 23, 2021
New York, New York

__________________________________
LEWIS J. LIMAN
United States District Judge