Brockton Savings Bank v. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co., First United Fund, Ltd.

Summary

The First Circuit affirmed a default judgment entered against First United Fund for willful discovery violations, evasiveness, and disobedience of court orders. The court held that the district court acted within its inherent authority to investigate the alleged non-retention of documents and impose severe sanctions. It also held that the damages hearing was procedurally sufficient because the losses were mathematically ascertainable and contributory negligence was not a defense to the intentional misrepresentation claim.

Holdings

1. The district court acted within its discretion in entering default judgment based on First United's repeated evasiveness, delay, disobedience of discovery orders, apparent misleading conduct concerning the existence of documents, and refusal to produce ordered witnesses.
2. The damages hearing was procedurally sufficient because Brockton's losses were definite and readily calculable, and the magistrate properly limited the hearing to computation of damages. First United was not entitled to prove Brockton's contributory negligence because the established intentional-misrepresentation claim was not subject to that defense, and Peat, Marwick's alleged conduct was not relevant to the separate claims against First United.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court acted within its authority and discretion in entering default judgment against First United for abusive discovery conduct and failure to comply with discovery orders.
2. Whether the damages hearing was procedurally sufficient when it was limited to calculating Brockton's total loss and did not permit evidence concerning contributory or comparative negligence by Brockton or alleged conduct by Peat, Marwick.

Disposition

affirmed