Loftin v. United Parcel Service Inc.

Filing 49

ORDER denying 42 Motion for Default Judgment. Signed by Judge Rodney S. Webb on 11/14/08. (bkp) (The docket text was modified on 11/18/2008 to correct the description of the document filed; linkage corrected.) (thd)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION KIM LOFTIN vs. 4:07-cv-564 DEFENDANTS PLAINTIFF UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. Order Denying Default Judgment Before the Court is Plaintiff Kim Loftin's Motion for Default Judgment against Defendant UPS (doc. #42). Loftin claims he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 because UPS failed to file an answer to the First Amended Complaint (doc. #28). UPS has now filed its Answer (doc. #47), along with a response to the motion, in which it claims there is no prejudice from its inadvertent failure to file earlier. The Court agrees. UPS has been consistently Its original Answer was filed proactive in pursuing its defense. in a timely fashion and it has since filed an Amended Answer as Loftin desired. Furthermore, UPS has filed a Motion for Summary Judgment (doc. #34) prior to the motion at issue, which again demonstrates its attentiveness to the issues. Particularly while this motion is pending, the Court finds the previous failure to file excusable, and thus Loftin's Motion is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this 14th day of November, 2008.

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?