MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER I. INTRODUCTION On November 22, 2019, Plaintiff commenced this action alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), the New York State Labor Law (“NYLL”), breach of contract, and unjust enrichment. See Dkt. No. 1. After all Defendants failed to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint, on March 13, 2020, Plaintiff submitted a request for the Clerk to enter default, which was entered that same day. See Dkt. Nos. 12 & 13. On April 28, 2020, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motions for default judgment as to liability, but ordered Plaintiff to submit additional evidence as to her claimed damages. See Dkt. No. 17. Plaintiff has submitted supplemental briefing on the issue of damages, which is presently before the Court. See Dkt. Nos. 18-20. The Court presumes the parties’ familiarity with this case and refers them to its April 28, 2020 Memorandum-Decision and Order for a detailed recitation of the underlying facts. See Dkt. No. 17 at 1-4. II. DISCUSSION In its previous decision, the Court found that Plaintiff is entitled to an entry of judgment in her favor for her claim pursuant to New York Labor Law Section 191 (“Section 191″) and her breach of contract claim.1 See Dkt. No. 20 at 17-18. While the allegations of a complaint pertaining to liability are deemed admitted upon entry of default, allegations relating to damages are not. See Greyhound Exhibitgroup, Inc. v. E.L.U.L. Realty Corp., 973 F.2d 155, 158 (2d Cir. 1992). Rather, a court must ensure that there is an adequate basis for the damages sought by a plaintiff before entering judgment in the amount demanded. See Santillan v. Henao, 822 F. Supp. 2d 284, 290 (E.D.N.Y. 2011). A court may make this determination based upon evidence presented at a hearing, but a hearing is not required. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2); Action S.A. v. Marc Rich & Co., Inc., 951 F.2d 504, 508 (2d Cir. 1991); Fustok v. ContiCommodity Servs., Inc., 873 F.2d 38, 40 (2d Cir. 1989). No hearing is necessary, for example, where, based “upon a review of detailed affidavits and documentary evidence,” the court is assured that there is an adequate basis for the damages sought. Continental Casualty Co. v. Contest Promotions NY, LLC, No. 15-CV-501, 2016 WL 1255726, *6 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 28, 2016) (citation omitted); see also McLean v. Wayside Outreach Dev. Inc., 624 Fed. Appx. 44, 45 (2d Cir. 2015) (observing that the district court did not abuse its discretion by failing to hold a hearing to determine damages where the court relied on “a single affidavit only partially based upon real numbers”). Section 198 of the NYLL provides as follows: In any action instituted in the courts upon a wage claim by an employee…in which the employee prevails, the court shall allow such employee to recover the full amount of underpayment, all reasonable attorney’s fees, prejudgment interest as required under the civil practice law and rules, and, unless the employer proves a good faith basis to believe that its underpayment of wages was in compliance with the law, an additional amount as liquidated damages equal to one hundred percent of the total amount of the wages found to be due[.] N.Y. Lab. Law §198(1-a). The term “wages” is defined as “earnings of an employee for labor services rendered regardless of whether the amount of earnings is determined on a time, piece, commission or other basis.” N.Y. Lab. Law §190(1). Included in an individual’s wages are “benefits or wage supplements.” See id. “[T]he term ‘benefits or wage supplements’ includes but is not limited to reimbursement for expenses; health, welfare, and retirement benefits; and vacation, separation or holiday pay.” N.Y. Lab. Law §198-c(2). Here, Plaintiff seeks a total of $100,159.92 for damages, attorneys fees, and court costs. See Dkt. No. 19 at 3. Plaintiff attests that her unpaid earnings amount to $47,121.62. See Dkt. No. 18 at 16. Plaintiff’s unpaid earnings calculation is based on the combination of her unpaid bi-weekly paychecks for seven pay periods, the commissions that she should have received for work completed, and costs incurred due to Defendant’s failure to pay health insurance premiums. See id. at
6, 10, 11-16. Based upon a review of the detailed affidavits provided, the Court finds that there is an adequate basis for the damages sought. See Continental Casualty Co., 2016 WL 1255726, at *6. Additionally, the Court notes that Defendant has not produced any evidence of a good faith basis for the underpayment of wages. Accordingly, pursuant to the mandatory liquidated damages provision of Section 198, the Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to liquidated damages in the amount of $47,121.62. Therefore, Plaintiff is entitled to $94,243.24 in damages for unpaid wages. Plaintiff also seeks prejudgment interest in the amount of $3,346.28. See Dkt. No. 19 at 12. Plaintiffs prevailing on NYLL claims are also entitled to prejudgment interest on all damages, excluding liquidated damages. See N.Y. Lab. Law §198(1-a). “For judgments based on New York law, a plaintiff is entitled to prejudgment interest at the rate of 9 percent pursuant to N.Y.C.P.L.R. §§5001, 5004.” Blue v. Finest Guard Servs., No. 09-CV-133, 2010 WL 2927398, *12 (E.D.N.Y. June 24, 2010). Where damages were incurred at various times, the court has discretion to choose a reasonable accrual date. See id. Here, Plaintiff calculated this interest from the $47,121.62 in unpaid compensation, with a nine percent interest rate from the time of Plaintiff’s termination to the time of the entry of default judgment. Plaintiff’s proposed start date for her interest calculation is after she had incurred damages through Defendant’s non-payment. See Dkt. No 18 at
