Kandey Co. v. Barbera

Full title: KANDEY COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff, v. LEO A. BARBERA, BARBERA UTILITY…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Oct 9, 2012

11-CV-478A (W.D.N.Y. Oct. 9, 2012)

Opinion

11-CV-478A

10-09-2012

KANDEY COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff, v. LEO A. BARBERA, BARBERA UTILITY CONTRACTING, INC., d/b/a HORIZONTAL HOLES AND HORIZONTAL EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURING, INC., Defendants.

RICHARD J. ARCARA

ORDER

The above-referenced case was referred to Magistrate Judge Hugh B. Scott, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). On August 10, 2012, Magistrate Judge Scott filed a Report and Recommendation, recommending:

(1) that plaintiff's motion for preclusive and other sanctions relief for defendant's failure to comply with discovery Orders [27] be granted;
(2) that defendants be prohibited from opposing or defending against plaintiff's claims that defendant Barbera is the alter ego of Horizontal Equipment Manufacturing, Inc. or Barbera Utility Contracting, Inc., d/b/a Horizontal Holes and that Horizontal Holes and/or HEM breached its contract with plaintiff;
(3) that plaintiff's other alternative sanctions should be denied;
(4) that defendants (both themselves and their counsel) should be required to pay interest on the sanctions previously imposed at the rate of 0.18%; and
(5) the imposition of sanctions for this second motion should be granted.

The Court has carefully reviewed the Report and Recommendation, the record in this case, and the pleadings and materials submitted by the parties, and no objections having been timely filed, it is hereby

ORDERED, that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and for the reasons set forth in Magistrate Judge Scott 's Report and Recommendation,

(1) plaintiff's motion for preclusive and other sanctions relief for defendant's failure to comply with discovery Orders [27] is granted;
(2) defendants are prohibited from opposing or defending against plaintiff's claims that defendant Barbera is the alter ego of Horizontal Equipment Manufacturing, Inc. or Barbera Utility Contracting, Inc., d/b/a Horizontal Holes and that Horizontal Holes and/or HEM breached its contract with plaintiff;
(3) plaintiff's other alternative sanctions are denied;
(4) defendants (both themselves and their counsel) are required to pay interest on the sanctions previously imposed at the rate of 0.18%; and
(5) the imposition of sanctions for this second motion is granted.

The case is referred back to Magistrate Judge Scott for further proceedings.

SO ORDERED.

________________

HONORABLE RICHARD J. ARCARA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE