PNC Bank, NA v. Natural Disaster Service LLC

• Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan
• Decided: October 27, 2025
• Docket: 5:25-cv-10814
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

PNC Bank, NA,

Plaintiff, Case No. 25-10814

v. Judith E. Levy United States District Judge Natural Disaster Service LLC, Mag. Judge Anthony P. Patti Defendant.

________________________________/

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS REGARDING THE MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT [15]

On October 10, 2025, Plaintiff PNC Bank, NA, filed a motion for default judgment as to Natural Disaster Service LLC. (ECF No. 15.) Plaintiff’s motion requests a judgment in the amount of $83,169.72. (Id. at PageID.82.) This amount “consists of $93,524.15 (minus sale of Equipment of $34,780.50), plus interest in the amount of $19,245.97 for the remaining balance due under the Agreement and $5,180.10 in attorneys’ fees and costs.” (Id.) Plaintiff is directed to file supplemental materials regarding the motion for default judgment. “Even when a default judgment is warranted based on a party’s failure to defend, the allegations in the complaint with respect to the amount of the damages are not deemed

true. The district court must instead conduct an inquiry in order to ascertain the amount of damages with reasonable certainty.” Vesligaj v.

Peterson, 331 F. App’x 351, 355 (6th Cir. 2009) (quoting Credit Lyonnais Sc. (USA), Inc. v. Alcantara, 183 F.3d 151, 155 (2d Cir. 1999)); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2). Here, there is no evidence in the record regarding

the “sale of Equipment of $34,780.50.” (ECF No. 15, PageID.82.)1 As such, the Court is unable to ascertain the amount of damages in this case. Additionally, Plaintiff’s counsel has not submitted appropriate

documentation regarding their request for attorney fees. “[T]he documentation offered in support of the hours charged must be of sufficient detail and probative value to enable the court to determine with

a high degree of certainty that such hours were actually and reasonably expended in the prosecution of the litigation.” Imwalle v. Reliance Med. Prods., Inc., 515 F.3d 531, 553 (6th Cir. 2008). Here, Plaintiff’s counsel

submitted a “bill of costs” that sets forth individual employee hourly

1 The Court notes that the complaint is verified. (ECF No. 1.) However, the verified complaint does not describe the sale of equipment. rates, the total hours worked per law firm, and a statement on costs expended on this matter. (ECF No. 15-2.) The “bill of costs” is not

supported by a declaration or an affidavit. Plaintiff’s counsel’s documentation regarding attorney fees is insufficient and does not allow

the Court to determine that the attorney fees and costs requested were “actually and reasonably expended in the prosecution of the litigation.” Imwalle, 515 F.3d at 553.

Plaintiff’s supplemental materials must be filed within 7 days of this order. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 27, 2025 s/Judith E. Levy Ann Arbor, Michigan JUDITH E. LEVY United States District Judge

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record and any unrepresented parties via the Court’s ECF System to their respective email or first-class U.S. mail addresses disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on October 27, 2025. s/William Barkholz WILLIAM BARKHOLZ Case Manager