United States District Court, E.D. New York
& ZABICKI LLP BY: Douglas J. Pick, Esq. Eric C. Zabicki,
Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff.
DiPASQUALE, DELLA FERRA & SODONO, P.C., BY: Sam Delia
Ferra, Jr., Esq., Attorneys for Defendants Charles Deehan and
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
LEONARD D. WEXLER United States District Judge.
the Court are Defendants Charles Deehan and Andrew
Deehan's (the "Deehans") objections to the
Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Locke on
January 5, 2017 (the "R&R"), in which
Magistrate Locke recommended that Defendants' motion to
vacate the default judgment entered against them on March 7,
2016 be denied. For the reasons set forth below, Magistrate
Locke's R&R is adopted in its entirety and
Defendants' motion to vacate the default judgment is
case arises out of the collapse of A-E Packaging, Inc., which
conducted business under the names "Tee Pee
Packaging" and "Tee Pee Packaging, Inc." (the
"Corporate Defendant" or "Tee Pee"). Tee
Pee was a manufacturer of plastic films and other plastic
products. The Plaintiff, Matrix Polymers, Inc.
("Plaintiff or "Matrix"), is a distributor of
plastic resin, which Tee Pee used to manufacture its line of
plastic products. Tee Pee's failure to pay Plaintiff for
resin sold and delivered between November 2014 and September
2016 led to the instant litigation.
commenced the within diversity action on October 21, 2015,
alleging fifteen causes of action against both Tee Pee and
the individual Defendants, Charles and Andrew Deehan. Despite
each being served with a Summons and Complaint, none of the
Defendants appeared in this action and, on December 16, 2015,
certificates of default were issued against all of the
January 13, 2016, Plaintiff moved for a default judgment
against Defendants for a sum certain, as set forth in the
Complaint. Defendants did not oppose the motion for default
judgment and, on March 7, 2016, the Court granted the motion,
awarding Plaintiff $890, 285.69 in damages, with all
Defendants held jointly and severally liable.
Deehans thereafter moved to vacate the default judgment as
entered solely against them. That motion was referred to
Magistrate Locke, who rendered his R&R on January 5,
2017, recommending that the Deehans' motion be denied in
its entirety. The Deehans object to that recommendation and
both sides have now fully briefed the issues.
The Findings of the Magistrate Judge and the Deehans'
well-reasoned and thorough R&R, Judge Locke recommended
that the Deehans' motion to vacate be denied, after
considering and rejecting each of the three arguments raised
by the Deehans in support of their motion. ...