Grand Cru Liquid Assets, LLC v. Chelsea Wine and Storage, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedApril 15, 2024
Docket1:23-cv-10018
StatusUnknown

This text of Grand Cru Liquid Assets, LLC v. Chelsea Wine and Storage, Inc. (Grand Cru Liquid Assets, LLC v. Chelsea Wine and Storage, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Grand Cru Liquid Assets, LLC v. Chelsea Wine and Storage, Inc., (S.D.N.Y. 2024).

Opinion

DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOC #: SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DATE FILED: 4/15/2024 GRAND CRU LIQUID ASSETS, LLC, Plaintiff, 23-CV-10018 (MMG) -against- ORDER SCHEDULING DEFAULT JUDGMENT CHELSEA WINE AND STORAGE, INC., et al., BRIEFING AND SHOW Defendants. CAUSE HEARING

MARGARET M. GARNETT, United States District Judge: On April 11, 2024, Plaintiff filed a motion for a default judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2) and Local Civil Rule 55.2(b). See Dkt. No. 16. It is hereby ORDERED that Defendants Chelsea Wine and Storage, Inc., The Chelsea Winery, LTD., Amelia Gancarz and Michael Gancarz (collectively, the “Defendants”) shall file any opposition to the motion for default judgment by May 9, 2024. Defendants are cautioned that corporate entities may appear in federal court only through licensed counsel, see Lattanzio v. COMTA, 481 F.3d 137, 140 (2d Cir. 2007), and where such an entity “repeatedly fails to appear by counsel, a default judgment may be entered against it,” Grace v. Bank Leumi Tr. Co. of N.Y., 443 F.3d 180, 192 (2d Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted). It is further ORDERED that Defendants appear and show cause before this Court on Thursday, May 30 at 9:30 a.m., why an order should not be issued granting a default judgment against it. The conference will be held in person in Courtroom 906 of the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, New York, New York 10007. In the event that Defendants appear or oppose the motion for default judgment prior to that date, the parties shall prepare to treat that conference as the Initial Pretrial Conference. That is, if any Defendant or Defendants appear, oppose the motion, or seek a nunc pro tunc extension of time to respond to the Complaint, then the parties — including any such appearing Defendant — shall follow the pre-conference procedures specified in Rule II(A)(5) of the Court’s Individual Rules & Practices, including by submitting a joint letter addressing certain topics and a proposed case management plan no later than the week prior to the conference. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff serve Defendants with (1) a copy of the motion for default judgment and all supporting papers; and (2) a copy of this Order by close of business

April 17, 2024. Within two business days of service, Plaintiffs must file proof of such service on the docket. Dated: April 15, 2024 New York, New York SO ORDERED.

GARGS Sacer United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Grace v. Bank Leumi Trust Company Of New York
443 F.3d 180 (Second Circuit, 2006)
Lattanzio v. Comta
481 F.3d 137 (Second Circuit, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Grand Cru Liquid Assets, LLC v. Chelsea Wine and Storage, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grand-cru-liquid-assets-llc-v-chelsea-wine-and-storage-inc-nysd-2024.