NGM Insurance Company v. Eagle General Contracting, LLC. et al

Filing 28

ORDERED that NGM's Motion for Default Judgment 14 is GRANTED. ORDERED that Plaintiff is awarded $404,456 in damages for payments it made to claimants under the bonds at issue in this case; Plaintiff is awarded $31,540.75 in consultan ts' fees, costs, and expenses; Plaintiff is awarded $64,438.44 in attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses; Plaintiff is entitled to an award of post-judgment interest at the legal rate until paid. Signed by District Judge Liam O'Grady on 1/13/2016. (rban, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Alexandria Division ) ) ) NGM Insurance Co., Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) Eagle General Contracting, LLC, and ) Mohammad Abdul Rahim a/k/a Hazem Rahim, Civil Action No. 1:14-cv-1500 ) ) ) Defendants. ) : ) ORDER This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff NGM Insurance Co.'s Motion for Entry of Default Judgment (Dkt. No. 14) against Defendants Eagle General Contracting, LLC and Mohammad Abdul Rahim a/k/a Hazem Rahim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2). The Clerk entered default pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) on February 5, 2015. (Dkt. No. 12). The Magistrate Judge issued a Report andRecommendation recommending entry of default judgment on September 1, 2015. (Dkt. No. 25). No objection was filed to this Report and Recommendation, but this Court ordered supplemental briefing on November 17,2015. (Dkt. No. 26). NGM submitted this additional briefing and exhibits on December 18,2015. (Dkt. No. 27). The Court now adopts the Report and Recommendation with some alteration in the amount of attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses awarded. I. Discussion The R&R from Magistrate Judge Ivan Davis recommends that the Motion for Default Judgement be granted and an order be entered awarding Plaintiff $497,760.75. This figure 1

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?