Court Opinion

ID: 9899417
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-16 18:05:02.88775+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:25.103331
License: Public Domain

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

DOVER MALL, LLC,                               :
                                               :        C.A. No.: K22C-07-013 JJC
                        Plaintiff,             :
                                               :
                v.                             :
                                               :
SAM TANG,                                      :
                                               :
                        Defendant.             :

                                Submitted: October 27, 2023
                                Decided: November 16, 2023

                                            ORDER

         On this 16th day of November 2023, having considered Defendant Sam
Tang’s motion for reconsideration and Plaintiff Dover Mall, LLC’s opposition, it
appears that:
         1.      Mr. Tang moves, pro se, for reconsideration of the Court’s decision
granting summary judgment in Dover Mall’s favor. In his motion, he does not seek
reconsideration of issues regarding his liability. Rather, he challenges the amount
of the judgment. Given the timing of his motion and his pro se status, the Court
considers his filing to be a request to amend the judgment pursuant to Superior Court
Civil Rule 59(d).
         2.      As background, the Court entered judgment on behalf of Dover Mall
in the amount of $276,089.72 on October 5, 2023.1                During summary judgment
briefing, Dover Mall provided a schedule itemizing the amount of unpaid rent due
it, which Mr. Tang did not contest. Namely, Mr. Tang contested his liability for

1
    Dover Mall, LLC v. Tang, 2023 WL 6536975, at *6 (Del. Super. Oct. 5, 2023).
breach of the lease but declined to address Dover Mall’s allegation regarding the
amount he owed. The Court then entered summary judgment on behalf of Dover
Mall in the amount included in Dover Mall’s schedule because Mr. Tang did not
identify a genuine issue of fact regarding the schedule’s accuracy.2
       3.      In Mr. Tang’s motion, he requests the Court to reconsider the amount
of the judgment because he has already paid a significant portion of it. In support,
he includes an affidavit and receipts from Dover Mall evidencing payments. He
also includes cancelled checks made payable to Dover Mall. More specifically, he
incorporates receipts from Dover Mall’s management office confirming payment
and acceptance of all but two of the payments he alleges. He contends he lost the
receipts for those two payments, but nevertheless presents copies of cancelled
checks he wrote to Dover Mall that confirms them. Combined, these documents and
his affidavit demonstrate that he paid a total of $49,964.50 on his account after April
1, 2020.3 For reasons that are unclear, Dover Mall, as a sophisticated commercial
enterprise, only credited him with a single $2,000 payment in the schedule that it
filed in support of its summary judgment motion.4
        4.     Dover Mall opposes Mr. Tang’s motion solely on the basis that he had
the opportunity to contest the correct amount during the summary judgment
proceeding but did not.       In other words, Dover Mall rests solely on a “too late”
defense. Importantly, Dover Mall does not contest that it received the payments that
Mr. Tang identifies. Nor does Dover Mall contest that Mr. Tang provides authentic
receipts from its business office and cancelled checks that confirm that he made the

2
  Id. at *5.
3
  Mr. Tang asserts a total of $77,920.19 in payments to Dover Mall after January 1, 2020. As the
Court explained in its October decision, however, only payments due after April 1, 2020 are
material to the case. Id. at *5. The payments he identified that were not credited to him in the
schedule, made after April 1, 2020, in the amount of $47,964.50 should be credited toward any
amounts owed.
4
  D.I. 10, Ex. B.
                                               2
payments. Given the current state of the record, the Court cannot ignore what the
parties do not contest.
          5.    For these reasons, the interests of justice require that the judgment be
amended pursuant to Superior Court Civil Rule 59(d). Namely, it would cause a
manifest injustice to include, in a final judgment, amounts that Mr. Tang already
paid to Dover Mall.       Because Dover Mall does not contest the accuracy of the
payments Mr. Tang identifies in his affidavit – $49,964.50 after April 1, 2020 – the
judgment is hereby amended. Dover Mall’s schedule in support of its summary
judgment motion identified only one payment of $2,000 made on the account after
April 1, 2020. 5     When accounting for that entry, Mr. Tang is due a credit of
$47,964.50 on the amount of the judgment entered on October 5th, 2023.
          WHEREFORE, Defendant Sam Tang’s motion to amend the judgment in this
case is GRANTED.          Final judgment is hereby entered in favor of Plaintiff Dover
Mall, LLC in the amount of $228,125.22.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

                                                             /s/ Jeffrey J Clark
                                                               Resident Judge

JJC:klc

5
    Id.
                                            3