Qwest Communications Corporation v. N.Y. Telenetworks, Inc.

Full title: QWEST COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. N.Y. TELENETWORKS, INC.…

Court: United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Jul 21, 2004

03 Civ. 2614 (RMB) (AJP) (S.D.N.Y. Jul. 21, 2004)

Opinion

03 Civ. 2614 (RMB) (AJP).

July 21, 2004

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

ANDREW PECK, Magistrate Judge

To the Honorable Richard M. Berman, United States District Judge:

On July 1, 2004, Judge Berman granted plaintiff Qwest Communications Corporation ("Qwest") a default judgment against defaulting defendant N.Y. Telenetworks, Inc. ("Telenetworks"), and referred the matter to me to "confirm, etc. amount of damages, interest, etc." (Dkt. No. 10: 7/1/04 Default Judgment.) Because of some confusion in plaintiff's papers, I ordered plaintiff to provide additional papers (which it did), and directed defendant Telenetworks to serve any opposing papers by July 16, 2004, which it has not done. (Dkt. No. 12: 7/14/04 Order.)

FACTS

"Where, as here, 'the court determines that defendant is in default, the factual allegations of the complaint, except those relating to the amount of damages, will be taken as true.'"Chen v. Jenna Lane, Inc., 30 F. Supp.2d 622, 623 (S.D.N.Y. 1998) (Carter, D.J. Peck, M.J.) (quoting 10A C. Wright, A. Miller M. Kane, Federal Practice Procedure: Civil 3d § 2688 at 58-59 (3d ed. 1998)).¹

1 Accord, e.g., SEC v. Breed, 01 Civ. 7798, 2004 WL 909170 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 29, 2004) (Peck, M.J.); Liu v. Jen Chu Fashion Corp., 00 Civ. 4221, 2004 WL 33412 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 7, 2004) (Peck, M.J.); Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v.Soto, 01 Civ. 0329, 2003 WL 22962810 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 17, 2003) (Peck, M.J.); Pacific Westeel, Inc. v. DR Installation, 01 Civ. 0293, 2003 WL 22359512 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 17, 2003) (Peck, M.J.); Medical Econ. Co. v. The Health Exchange, Inc., 01 Civ. 11262, 2003 WL 22346391 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 15, 2003) (Peck, M.J.); Trustees of the Elevator Div. Ret. Benefit Plan v. Premier Elevator Co., 03 Civ. 2703, 2003 WL 22127912 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 16, 2003); Cablevision Sys. New York City Corp. v. Torres, 02 Civ. 7602, 2003 WL 22078938 at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 9, 2003) (Peck, M.J.); Eastern Freight Ways v. Eastern Motor Freight, 02 Civ. 3138, 2003 WL 21540382 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. July 9, 2003) (Peck, M.J.), report rec. adopted as modified on other grounds, 2003 WL 21921270 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 11, 2003); Schruefer v. Winthorpe Grant, Inc., 99 Civ. 9365, 2003 WL 21511157 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. July 2, 2003) (Peck, M.J.); Joy Lud Distribs. Int'l, Inc. v. Contini, 00 Civ. 5011, 2003 WL 554616 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 28, 2003) (Peck, M.J.); Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. v. Brown, 01 Civ. 9155, 2002 WL 1226863 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. June 5, 2002) (Peck, M.J.); King Vision Pay-Per-View Corp. v.Drencia Rest. Corp., 01 Civ. 9777, 2002 WL 1000284 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. May 15, 2002) (Peck, M.J.); Ainbinder v. Bernice Mining Contracting, Inc., 01 Civ. 2492, 2002 WL 461576 at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 26, 2002) (Peck, M.J.); Sterling Nat'l Bank v.A-1 Hotels Int'l, Inc., 00 Civ. 7352, 2002 WL 461574 at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 26, 2002) (Peck, M.J.); King Vision Pay-Per-View Corp. v. Papacito Lidia Luncheonette, Inc., 01 Civ. 7575, 2001 WL 1558269 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 6, 2001) (Peck, M.J.); Trustees of the Pension Welfare Funds of the Moving Picture Mach. Operators Union, Local 306 v. Gordon's Film Co. (New York) Int'l Inc., 00 Civ. 8452, 2001 WL 1415145 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 13, 2001) (Peck, M.J.); Coast To Coast Fabrics, Inc. v. Tracy Evans, Ltd., 00 Civ. 4417, 2001 WL 5037 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 2, 2001) (Peck, M.J.); Starbucks Corp. v. Morgan, 99 Civ. 1404, 2000 WL 949665 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. July 11, 2000) (Peck, M.J.); King Vision Pay-Per-View, Ltd. v. New Paradise Rest., 99 Civ. 10020, 2000 WL 378053 at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 11, 2000) (Peck, M.J.); Independent Nat'l Distrib., Inc. v. Black Rain Communications, Inc., 94 Civ. 8464, 1996 WL 238401 at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 4, 1996) (Keenan, D.J. Peck, M.J.).

The Amended Complaint sues for a fixed amount, $481,829.39, plus interest, for, inter alia, breach of contract and account stated. (Dkt. No. 1: Compl. ¶¶ 5-12.)

ANALYSIS

The Second Circuit has approved the holding of an inquest by affidavit, without an in-person court hearing, "'as long as [the Court has] ensured that there was a basis for the damages specified in the default judgment.'" Transatlantic Marine Claims Agency, Inc. v. Ace Shipping Corp., 109 F.3d 105, 111 (2d Cir. 1997) (quoting Fustok v. Conti Commodity Servs., Inc., 873 F.2d 38, 40 (2d Cir. 1989)).²

Qwest has supplied its contract with Telenetworks (McCoy 7/19/04 Aff. ¶ 4 Ex. A) and Qwest's billing ledger for Telenetworks, which establishes the principal amount unpaid and due at $481,829.39 (McCoy 7/19/04 Aff. ¶ 5 Ex. B). Thus, Qwest is entitled to judgment for the fixed amount sought in the complaint of $481,829.39.

The Qwest-Telenetworks agreement calls for interest on the unpaid amount of one percent per month. (McCoy 7/19/04 Aff. Ex. A: Contract ¶ 6.1.) The number of months from December 31, 2001 until July 15, 2004 is 30.5 months. Qwest has calculated the interest, on a monthly compounded basis, as $177,377.80. (McCoy 7/19/04 Aff. ¶ 5 Ex. C.) Qwest, however, has not provided a basis for employing compound as opposed to simple interest. The Court believes the latter to be appropriate. Accordingly, Qwest is entitled to judgment for contractual interest through July 15, 2004 of $146,957.96 (the principal amount of $481,829.39 times 30.5 months times.01).

Qwest also seeks $236.50³ in costs for the Clerk's fee and process service fees, which are appropriate.

3 Qwest dropped its prior request for an additional $20.

CONCLUSION

Qwest should be awarded judgment for the principal amount of $481,829.39, plus interest of $146,957.96 through July 15, 2004, and costs of $236.50, for a total of $629,023.85.

Qwest is to serve this Order on Telenetworks and file proof of service with the Clerk of Court.

FILING OF OBJECTIONS TO THIS REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties shall have ten (10) days from service of this Report to file written objections. See also Fed.R.Civ.P. 6. Such objections (and any responses to objections) shall be filed with the Clerk of the Court, with courtesy copies delivered to the chambers of the Honorable Richard M. Berman, 40 Centre Street, Room 201, and to my chambers, 500 Pearl Street, Room 1370. Any requests for an extension of time for filing objections must be directed to Judge Berman. Failure to file objections will result in a waiver of those objections for purposes of appeal. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466 (1985); IUE AFL-CIO Pension Fund v.Herrmann, 9 F.3d 1049, 1054 (2d Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 822, 115 S.Ct. 86 (1994); Roldan v. Racette, 984 F.2d 85, 89 (2d Cir. 1993); Frank v. Johnson, 968 F.2d 298, 300 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1038, 113 S.Ct. 825 (1992);Small v. Secretary of Health Human Servs., 892 F.2d 15, 16 (2d Cir. 1989); Wesolek v. Canadair Ltd., 838 F.2d 55, 57-59 (2d Cir. 1988); McCarthy v. Manson, 714 F.2d 234, 237-38 (2d Cir. 1983); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72, 6(a), 6(e).