ADP Dealer Services, Inc. v. Planet Automall, Inc., No. 1:2009cv00185 - Document 72 (E.D.N.Y. 2012)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS, Summary judgment was granted in favor of pltff on January 12, 2012. The matter was then referred to Mag. Judge Reyes for a R&R after conducting an inquest as to the amount of damages to be awarded. That R&R, dated September 17, 2012, advised the pltff that objections, if any, were to be filed and served w/in fourteen days of receipt, and that failure to do so may waive the right to appeal. As of this date, no objection has been filed. The R&R, which tho roughly reviewed the facts and the controlling authorities is, after due consideration, hereby adopted in its entirety. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that judgment be entered in favor of pltff. in the amount of $341,461.89, plus $65.44 per diem in pre-judgment interest to run from May 11, 2012 through date of entry of final judgment. Ordered by Judge I. Leo Glasser on 10/3/2012. c-e/m. (Layne, Monique)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
ADP Dealer Services, Inc. v. Planet Automall, Inc. Doc. 72 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------x ADP, INC., Plaintiff, FiLED -againstUS PLANET AUTOMALL, INC., Defendant. "* IN CI ORDER 09 CV 0185 (ILG) (RER) OFF1CE . 7':- r.=.o N.Y OCT 0 3 2012 * BROOKLYN OFFICE -------------------------------------------------------x GLASSER, United States District Judge: Summary judgment was granted in favor of plaintiff on January 12, 2012. The matter was then referred to Magistrate Judge Reyes for a Report and Recommendation after conducting an inquest as to the amount of damages to be awarded. That Report and Recommendation, dated September 17, 2012, advised the plaintiff that objections to it, if any, were to be filed and served within fourteen days of receipt, and that failure to do so may waive the right to appeal. As of this date, no objection has been filed. The Report and Recommendation, which thoroughly reviewed the facts and the controlling authorities is, after due consideration, hereby adopted in its entirety. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that judgment be entered in favor of plaintiff in the amount of $341,461.89, plus $65.44 per diem in pre-judgment interest to run from May 11, 2012 through date of entry of final judgment, broken down as follows: 1) $112,616-44 in damages under the DMS Agreement; 2) $19,366.93 in damages under the SEM Agreement; 3) $7,150.72 in damages under the VS Agreement; 4) $64,351.63 in interest and $55.54 per diem from May 11, 2012 through date of entry of final judgment in pre-judgment interest under the DMS Agreement; 5) $9,667ยท97 in interest and $6.37 per diem from May 11, 2012 through date of entry of final judgment in pre-judgment interest under the SEM Agreement; 6) $3,942.47 in interest and $3.53 per diem from May 11,2012 through date of entry of final judgment in pre-judgment interest under the VS Agreement; Dockets.Justia.com 7) $118,657.00 in attorney's fees; and 8) $5,708.73 in costs. The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to the parties either electronically through ECF or by mail. SO ORDERED. Dated: Brooklyn, New York October 3, 2012 s/ILG ""I. Leo
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
