Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Craftline Graphics, Inc. v. Total Press Sales & Service LLC

United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, Fort Wayne Division

April 17, 2018

CRAFTLINE GRAPHICS, INC., and KAPPA GRAPHICS, L.P., Plaintiffs,
v.
TOTAL PRESS SALES & SERVICE, LLC, Defendant.

          OPINION AND ORDER

          THERESA L. SPRINGMANN CHIEF JUDGE

         This matter is before the Court on a Motion for Default Judgment [ECF No. 17] against the sole Defendant Total Press Sales & Service, LLC, filed by Plaintiffs Craftline Graphics, Inc. (Craftline), and Kappa Graphics, L.P. (Kappa), on January 24, 2018.[1]

         The Plaintiffs have sued the Defendant for breach of contract, breach of warranty, and negligence, alleging that the Defendant partially performed its duties to clean, refurbish, load, transport, rig, and reassemble Plaintiff Kappa's printing press, which was on lease to Plaintiff Craftline. Upon learning from the manufacturer of the printing press that the printing press was damaged, the Plaintiffs claim that the Defendant advised they could no longer work on the project and abandoned work. Further, the Plaintiffs allege that the Defendant was negligent in damaging the printing press in the first instance and then continuing to try to run the printing press in its damaged condition, resulting in additional damage. Plaintiff Kappa claims that it has not received any payments pursuant to its lease agreement with Plaintiff Craftline because of the Defendant's negligent performance. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs seek damages for the costs of the parts, service, internal labor, material, and repairs they have incurred to try to repair the printing press, as well as lost profits for lease payments owed to Plaintiff Kappa from Plaintiff Craftline.

         The Plaintiffs obtained a Clerk's Entry of Default [ECF No. 16] against the Defendant pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a). In the Plaintiffs Motion for Default Judgment, the Plaintiffs request that the Court enter judgment as follows (see Aff for Entry of Default Judgment, ECF No. 17-1):

$88, 216.00 (parts and service paid by Plaintiff Craftline for installation costs) (see Summary of Invoices, ECF No. 17-2);
• $49, 275.00 (internal labor/materials costs Plaintiff Craftline incurred for the initial installation/lost labor savings due to delays) (see Summary of Additional Costs, ECF No. 17-3);
• $500, 760.00 (repair costs Plaintiff Kappa will incur related to the disassembly, reinstallation, and repair of the printing press) (see ECF No. 17-4);
• $378, 005.00 (Plaintiff Kappa's lost profits from delayed lease payments by Plaintiff Craftline related to delays by the Defendant) (see Lease Agmnt, ECF No. 17-5);
• Attorney fees of $22, 744.00 and costs of $500.53 (see Mot. for Attorney Fees, ECF No. 13);
• Interest pre-judgment in the amount of $155, 695.99 (calculated at ¶ 8% interest rate since the day the cause of action accrued); and
• Interest post judgment at 8%.

         The Plaintiff s counsel affirms that the calculation of damages is true and correct.

         ANALYSIS

         Once the default of a party has been established for failure to plead or otherwise defend, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 authorizes a party to seek and a court to enter a default judgment. As long as a plaintiffs allegations are well-pleaded, a default judgment, as a general rule, “‘establishe[s], as a matter of law, that defendants [are] liable to plaintiff as to each cause of action alleged in the complaint.'” Dundee Cement Co. v. Howard Pipe & Concrete Prods., Inc.,722 F.2d 1319, 1323 (7th Cir. 1983) (quoting Breuer Elec. Mfg. Co. v. Toronado Sys. of Am., Inc.,687 F.2d 182, 186 (7th Cir. 1982)); see also O' Brien v. R.J. O'Brien & Assocs., Inc.,998 F.2d 1394, 1404 (7th Cir. 1993). The party moving for a default judgment must then establish entitlement to the relief sought. In re Catt,368 F.3d 789, 793 (7th Cir. 2004); RBS Citizens, N.A. v. M. & M. Brokerage, LLC, No. 4:11-CV-0059, 2012 WL 839223, at *2 (N.D. Ind. Mar. 9, 2012) (“Yet while the factual allegations relating to liability are taken as true, the amount of damages must be proved.”). Under Rule 54(c), a party obtaining a default judgment in its favor is not entitled to a judgment that differs in kind from or an award that exceeds the amount demanded in the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.