From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gutman v. Klein

United States District Court, E.D. New York
Dec 1, 2008
03 Civ. 1570 (BMC) (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 1, 2008)

Summary

adopting finding of the Magistrate Judge that spoliator acted in bad faith by intentionally deleting computer files

Summary of this case from Pension Committee of the University of Montreal Pension Plan v. Banc of America Securities, LLC

Opinion

03 Civ. 1570 (BMC).

December 1, 2008


ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION


This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Robert M. Levy, dated October 15, 2008 (the "Recommendation"), which recommends that the Court enter default judgment against defendants and award plaintiffs attorney's fees and costs based on the spoliation of evidence contained on defendant Zalman Klein's laptop computer. The Court has reviewed the Recommendation and defendants' objections thereto, and adopts the Recommendation in its entirety as the decision of the Court.

Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3), a "district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to." A proper objection requires reference to a specific portion of the magistrate judge's recommendation; if a party "makes only conclusory or general objections, or simply reiterates his original arguments, the Court reviews the Report and Recommendation only for clear error." Pall Corp. v. Entegris, Inc., 249 F.R.D. 48, 51 (E.D.N.Y. 2008) (quoting Barratt v. Joie, No. 96 CIV 0324, 2002 WL 335014, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 4, 2002)). Furthermore, even in a de novo review of a party's specific objections, the court will not consider "arguments, case law and/or evidentiary material which could have been, but [were] not, presented to the magistrate judge in the first instance." Kennedy v. Adamo, No. 02 CV 01776, 2006 WL 3704784, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 1, 2006) (quoting Haynes v. Quality Markets, No. 02-CV-250, 2003 WL 23610575, at *3 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 22, 2003)).

In objecting to the Recommendation, defendants have asserted that because "Klein objects to the [Recommendation] in its entirety, a de novo review is required of the entire report." However, this conclusory assertion contains no specific challenges to the Recommendation, and reviewing the entire matter de novo based on this generic objection would impermissibly circumvent Rule 72(b)(3). See Pall Corp., 249 F.R.D. at 51. Additionally, although defendants' objections do contain specific challenges to (1) Magistrate Judge Levy's finding that the deleted files were relevant to plaintiffs' claims; (2) Magistrate Judge Levy's acceptance of the Stroz Friedberg, LLC opinion; (3) the harshness of a terminating sanction; and (4) the inclusion of plaintiffs 185 Marcy LLC and Park Offices, LLC and defendant Dina Klein in any inquests necessary to determine damages, all of these arguments either have been, or certainly could have been, presented to Magistrate Judge Levy in the first instance. See Kennedy, 2006 WL 3704784, at *1; Defendants' Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on Motion for Spoliation Sanctions, Aug. 25, 2008 (Doc. #279); Defendants' Memorandum of Law on Spoliation, Aug. 15, 2008 (Doc. # 276). Therefore, de novo review on any of these challenges is improper, and the appropriate standard of review is for clear error. See Pall Corp., 249 F.R.D. at 51.

The Court has reviewed the Recommendation for clear error and has found none. On the contrary, the Recommendation is thoroughly and clearly analyzed, with no clear errors of fact or law. The Court therefore adopts the Recommendation in full as the decision of the Court, and Orders that default judgment be entered against defendants.

The Court refers this matter to Magistrate Judge Levy to conduct an inquest as to damages, including the attorneys' fees and costs associated with the discovery dispute at issue, and to render a report and recommendation on those issues. In addition, the Clerk of the Court is directed to send a copy of this Order, together with the Recommendation, to the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York for such action, if any, as he deems appropriate.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Gutman v. Klein

United States District Court, E.D. New York
Dec 1, 2008
03 Civ. 1570 (BMC) (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 1, 2008)

adopting finding of the Magistrate Judge that spoliator acted in bad faith by intentionally deleting computer files

Summary of this case from Pension Committee of the University of Montreal Pension Plan v. Banc of America Securities, LLC

adopting finding of the Magistrate Judge that spoliator acted in bad faith by intentionally deleting computer files

Summary of this case from Pension Comm. of the Univ. of Montreal Pension Plan v. Banc of Am. Secs, LLC

adopting finding of the Magistrate Judge that spoliator acted in bad faith by intentionally deleting computer files

Summary of this case from PENSION COMM. OF UNIV. OF MONTREAL v. BANC OF AM. SEC

granting default judgment where defendants intentionally destroyed evidence

Summary of this case from In re a M Florida Properties II, LLC

rejecting party's objection to the "entirety" of an R&R and holding that " proper objection requires reference to a specific portion of the magistrate judge's recommendation"

Summary of this case from Forrester v. Prison Health Servs.

performing clear error review where the objection "contains no specific challenges to the Recommendation"

Summary of this case from Obanya v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.
Case details for

Gutman v. Klein

Case Details

Full title:ARYEH GUTMAN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. ZALMAN KLEIN, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. New York

Date published: Dec 1, 2008

Citations

03 Civ. 1570 (BMC) (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 1, 2008)

Citing Cases

PENSION COMM. OF UNIV. OF MONTREAL v. BANC OF AM. SEC

See Treppel v. Biovail, 249 F.R.D. 111, 121 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (collecting cases); Doe v. Norwalk Cmty. Coll.,…

Pension Comm. of the Univ. of Montreal Pension Plan v. Banc of Am. Secs, LLC

See Treppel v. Biovail, 249 F.R.D. 111, 121 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) (collecting cases); Doe v. Norwalk Cmty. Coll.,…