Filed: Oct. 23, 2019
Latest Update: Oct. 23, 2019
Summary: ORDER DIANE J. HUMETEWA , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs' Motion for Damages in this closed case. (Doc. 60). Plaintiffs' untimely motion is not procedurally supported by any federal or local rule. 1 Moreover, while the case was open, Plaintiffs did not establish that they are entitled to the damages requested even though were given multiple opportunities to do so over the life of the case. The motion will be denied. Oral argument was held on Plaintiffs' Mot
Summary: ORDER DIANE J. HUMETEWA , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs' Motion for Damages in this closed case. (Doc. 60). Plaintiffs' untimely motion is not procedurally supported by any federal or local rule. 1 Moreover, while the case was open, Plaintiffs did not establish that they are entitled to the damages requested even though were given multiple opportunities to do so over the life of the case. The motion will be denied. Oral argument was held on Plaintiffs' Moti..
More
ORDER
DIANE J. HUMETEWA, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs' Motion for Damages in this closed case. (Doc. 60). Plaintiffs' untimely motion is not procedurally supported by any federal or local rule.1 Moreover, while the case was open, Plaintiffs did not establish that they are entitled to the damages requested even though were given multiple opportunities to do so over the life of the case. The motion will be denied.
Oral argument was held on Plaintiffs' Motion for Default Judgment on February 1, 2019. (Doc. 52). At the hearing, Plaintiffs were ordered to file a third supplemental briefing setting forth "the specific amount of damages sought and the legal authority allowing such damages." (Doc. 54). Plaintiffs filed their third supplemental brief on March 7, 2019, containing 118 pages of additional information, some of which had already been provided. Plaintiff did not request a sum certain amount for alleged physical and emotional distress or for defamation of reputation. (Doc. 58 at 9). On March 13, 2019, the Court entered an Order granting default judgment, but denying the damages sought based on Plaintiffs' failure to respond to the Court's specific questions as to proof of damages. (Doc. 58). The case was thereafter closed on March 13, 2019.
Plaintiffs' current motion consists of two pages of arguments, and a two-page declaration from Plaintiffs Wyler and Carstens. (Doc. 60). The motion cites no case law or federal or local rule and contains substantially less information than the previous filings filed months ago. There are also inconsistencies between the amounts requested in the Motion and proposed order, and the amounts testified to by the Plaintiffs in their declarations. For instance, Plaintiff Carstens declares $332,000 in damages based on her 2016 earnings, while the motion and proposed order requests $300,000 in damages for Carstens. Plaintiffs have not met their burden of establishing damages in this case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b). Therefore, the motion will be denied and the case will remain closed.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion for Damages (Doc. 60) is denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case shall remain closed.
