CDBD Holdings, Inc. v. Slavutsky, 1:23-cv-00071

CDBD Holdings, Inc. is the plaintiff, seeking a default judgment against the defendants, including Elizabeth Slavutsky, in the Southern District of New York.
Plaintiff moved for a default judgment, which is unopposed by defendants as of September 2024.
Plaintiff claims damages based on an unpaid promissory note, listing an unpaid principal, pre-default interest, and default interest.
The court found discrepancies in the principal amount listed in the complaint compared to the original Note Agreement, raising questions about calculations.
The court noted that it cannot grant default judgment on damages without detailed, admissible evidence supporting the amounts claimed.
Plaintiff was ordered to submit explanations and supporting documentation clarifying the calculation of principal and interests, due by December 15, 2024.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Amount of Principal Claimed	$5,905,869 unpaid principal	None (no opposition)	Court requires clarification of discrepancy
Calculation of Pre-Default Interest	$288,569.37 claimed at 7% rate	None (no opposition)	Court needs calculation method and start date
Calculation of Default Interest	Amounts at increased rate	None (no opposition)	Court requests detailed computation to bring current
Sufficiency of Damages Evidence	Complaint and affidavits submitted	None (no opposition)	Court demands admissible, granular evidence

Finkel v. Romanowicz, 577 F.3d 79 (A court accepts well-pleaded facts as true on default, but not damages.)
Cotton v. Slone, 4 F.3d 176 (Damages must have an evidentiary basis on default judgment.)
Greyhound Exhibitgroup, Inc. v. E.L.U.L. Realty Corp., 973 F.2d 155 (Damages in default judgment must be established to a reasonable certainty.)
Cement & Concrete Workers Dist. Council Welfare Fund v. Metro Found. Contractors Inc., 699 F.3d 230 (District court may resolve damages by affidavit or hearing after default.)