PNC Equipment Finance, LLC v. IKZ, Inc. et al
Filing
38
OPINION and ORDER denying 29 Defendants' Motion to Vacate Final Judgment and Vacate Entry of Default. See Order for details. Signed by Judge John E. Steele on 9/17/2014. (MAW)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
PNC EQUIPMENT FINANCE, LLC,
a Delaware limited liability
company, successor to PNCEF,
LLC, an Indiana limited
liability company, dba PNC
Equipment
Finance,
fka
National
City
Commercial
Capital Company, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No: 2:13-cv-763-FtM-29CM
IKZ,
INC.
KOVACEVIC,
and
IVAN
J.
Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants' Motion to
Vacate Final Judgment and Vacate Entry of Default (Doc. #29) filed
on May 23, 2014.
Plaintiff filed a Response (Doc. #32) on June
23, 2014, Defendants filed a Reply (Doc. #36) on July 7, 2014, and
Plaintiff filed a Surreply (Doc. #37) on July 21, 2014.
For the
reasons set forth below, the motion is denied.
I.
On December 12, 2013 Plaintiff PNC Equipment Finance, LLC
(PNC)
filed
a
Second
Amended
Complaint
(Doc.
#14)
against
Defendants IKZ, Inc. (IKZ) and Ivan J. Kovacevic (Kovacevic).
PNC
alleged that IKZ defaulted under a lease agreement (the Lease) and
that Kovacevic defaulted under a Personal Guaranty promising IKZ’s
performance under the Lease.
(Id.)
PNC sought judgment against
Defendants for the alleged breaches and a writ of possession
granting PNC permanent possession of the machinery covered by the
Lease.
(Id.)
On April 2, 2014, the Court granted PNC’s Motion for Entry of
Clerk’s Default (Doc. #20), finding that Defendants had failed to
serve an answer within 21 days after being served with the Second
Amended Complaint.
(Doc. #21.)
A Clerk’s Default was entered
against Defendants (Doc. #22), but PNC did not seek a default
judgment and no such judgment was issued.
On April 23, 2014, PNC
filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal without Prejudice (Doc. #25)
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) which “hereby dismisses
the above action against Defendants IKZ, Inc. and Ivan J. Kovacevic
without prejudice.”
The Court entered an Order (Doc. #26) finding
that Defendants had not filed an answer or motion for summary
judgment
and,
therefore,
voluntary
pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i).
entry
of
judgment
(Doc. #26.)
accordingly,
motions, and closed the file.
dismissal
terminated
was
appropriate
This Order directed
all
deadlines
and
Judgment (Doc. #27) was filed on
April 24, 2014, dismissing the action without prejudice.
Defendants now move to vacate the final judgment and the entry
of default.
Defendants argue that vacatur is warranted because
the voluntary dismissal and entry of default were obtained as a
- 2 -
result of PNC’s fraud, misrepresentations, and other misconduct.
In response, PNC argues that (1) it had the right to voluntarily
dismiss the case because the requirements of Rule 41 were met; and
(2) the Rule 41 dismissal terminated the Court’s jurisdiction over
the case and thereby prevents the Court from setting aside the
entry of default.
II.
The
voluntary
dismissal
was
granted
pursuant
to
Rule
41(a)(1)(A)(i), which allows for voluntarily dismissal as a matter
of right provided that that a defendant has not yet served an
answer or a motion for summary judgment.
“[A] notice of dismissal
under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) is effective immediately upon filing.”
Anago Franchising, Inc. v. Shaz, LLC, 677 F.3d 1272, 1277 (11th
Cir. 2012) (quoting Matthews v. Gaither, 902 F.2d 877, 880 (11th
Cir. 1990)).
Thus, Plaintiff’s notice of dismissal in this case
was self-executing, and required no action by the district court.
Univ. of S. Alabama v. Am. Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405, 409 (11th
Cir. 1999).
Indeed, following the Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) notice of
dismissal, a district court lacks jurisdiction over the substance
of the case.
Matthews, 902 F.2d at 880.
Further, such a dismissal
“renders the proceedings a nullity and leaves the parties as if
the action had never been brought.”
Univ. of S. Alabama, 168 F.3d
at 409 (quoting Williams v. Clarke, 82 F.3d 270, 273 (8th Cir.
1996)).
- 3 -
It is undisputed that Defendants had not filed an answer or
motion for summary judgment at the time PNC voluntarily dismissed
the case.
Therefore, Plaintiff’s dismissal was effective at that
time with or without a judgment.
The ministerial entry of a
judgment does not afford Defendants any basis to challenge the
dismissal.
The case and the jurisdiction of the Court is gone
with the filing of the notice of dismissal.
There is no need to
vacate the default since, as a matter of law, that becomes a
“nullity.”
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
Defendants' Motion to Vacate Final Judgment and Vacate Entry
of Default (Doc. #29) is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this
of September, 2014.
Copies:
Counsel of Record
- 4 -
17th
day
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?