From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Giumarra Agricom Int'l, LLC v. Fresh Growers Direct, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Feb 27, 2018
17-CV-2222 (CBA) (PK) (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 27, 2018)

Opinion

17-CV-2222 (CBA) (PK)

02-27-2018

GIUMARRA AGRICOM INTERNATIONAL, LLC, Plaintiff, v. FRESH GROWERS DIRECT, INC., and YUSUFOV YUVAK, Defendants.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MEMORANDUM & ORDER AMON, United States District Judge :

In the complaint filed in this action, Plaintiff Giumarra Agricom International, LLC ("Giumarra") claims that defendants Fresh Growers Direct, Inc. ("Fresh Growers"), and its principal, Yusufov Yuval, breached the parties' contractual agreement and violated the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act ("PACA") by failing to pay for three shipments of avocados. Neither of the defendants have appeared in these proceedings, and the Clerk of Court noted the defaults of Yuvak on July 6, 2017, (D.E. # 11), and Fresh Growers on August 11, 2017, (D.E. # 15). Giumarra thereafter moved for a default judgment against the defendants on August 25, 2017, (D.E. # 16), and on September 7, 2017 the Court referred that motion to Magistrate Judge Peggy Kuo for a Report and Recommendation ("R&R"). On January 30, 2018, Magistrate Judge Kuo issued a thorough and well-reasoned R&R, recommending that Giumarra's motion be granted in part and denied in part. (D.E. # 17.)

When deciding whether to adopt a report and recommendation, a district court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). To accept those portions of the R&R to which no timely objection has been made, "a district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record." Jarvis v. N. Am. Globex Fund, L.P., 823 F. Supp. 2d 161, 163 (E.D.N.Y. 2011) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

No party has objected to the R&R. The Court has therefore reviewed the R&R for clear error. Finding none, the Court adopts the R&R as the opinion of the Court. Giumarra is entitled to the following damages: $31,040 for breach of contract and violations of the PACA, and pre-judgment interest in the amount of $10,988.36. Plaintiff is also entitled to post-judgment interest as prescribed by 28 U.S.C. § 1961. Finally, the Court adopts in full the recommended award of $6,074 in attorneys' fees and costs.

CONCLUSION

For the reasons stated above, the Court adopts the R&R. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter the following judgment against the defendants, jointly and severally, and in favor of the plaintiff: $42,028.36 in damages, plus $6,074 in attorneys' fees, and post-judgment interest as prescribed by 28 U.S.C. § 1961. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case.

SO ORDERED. Dated: February 27, 2018

Brooklyn, New York

s/Carol Bagley Amon

Carol Bagley Amon

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Giumarra Agricom Int'l, LLC v. Fresh Growers Direct, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Feb 27, 2018
17-CV-2222 (CBA) (PK) (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 27, 2018)
Case details for

Giumarra Agricom Int'l, LLC v. Fresh Growers Direct, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:GIUMARRA AGRICOM INTERNATIONAL, LLC, Plaintiff, v. FRESH GROWERS DIRECT…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Feb 27, 2018

Citations

17-CV-2222 (CBA) (PK) (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 27, 2018)

Citing Cases

Root Bros. Farms v. Big Big Produce, Inc.

“Such language is sufficient to preserve Plaintiff's PACA rights.” Giumarra Agricom Int'l, LLC v. Fresh…

Gov't Emps. Ins. Co. v. Wilkins Williams Med.

Because Plaintiffs seek default judgment only on the common law fraud claim, all other claims against the…