Magliocchini v. Casa Panza Cafe, Inc. et al

Filing 17

ORDER granting 16 Motion to Set Aside Default. ; Glenda Baldriche response due 4/18/2018; Casa Panza Cafe, Inc. response due 4/18/2018; Juan Martinez response due 4/18/2018. -Joint Scheduling Report due by 5/9/2018 Signed by Judge Robert N. Scola, Jr on 4/12/2018. (vmz)

United States District Court
for the
Southern District of Florida
Maria Magliocchini, Plaintiff,
v.
Casa Panza Café, Inc., and others,
Defendants.

)
)
)
Civil Action No. 18-20688-Civ-Scola
)
)
)

Order Granting Motion to Set Aside Clerk’s Default
This cause is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Set Aside Clerk’s
Default. (Mot., ECF No. 16.) After considering the Defendants’ motion, and the
record, the Court grants the Defendants’ motion (ECF No. 16).
On February 27, 2018, the Plaintiff served the Defendant Casa Panza
Café, Inc. (ECF No. 6.) On March 2, 2018, the Plaintiff served the Defendants
Juan Martinez and Glenda Baldriche. (ECF Nos. 7, 8.) On March 27, 2018,
after the Defendants failed to answer the complaint, the Plaintiff obtained a
clerk’s default as to the Defendants. (ECF Nos. 11, 13.) All three Defendants
now move to vacate the clerk’s default.
“It is the general rule that default judgments are ordinarily disfavored
because cases should be decided upon their merits whenever reasonably
possible.” Creative Tile Marketing, Inc. v. SICIS Intern., 922 F. Supp. 1534, 1536
(S.D. Fla. 1996) (Moore, J.). A court may set aside a clerk’s default for good
cause shown. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(c); see also Compania Interamericana ExportImport, S.A. v. Compania Dominicana de Aviacion, 88 F.3d 948, 951 (11th Cir.
1996). “‘Good cause’ is a mutable standard, varying from situation to situation.
It is also a liberal one—but not so elastic as to be devoid of substance.” Id. To
determine whether good cause exists, the Court considers (1) whether the
default was culpable or willful; (2) whether setting it aside would prejudice the
adversary; and (3) whether the defaulting party presents a meritorious defense.
Id.
The Defendants have demonstrated to the Court’s satisfaction that their
failure to respond to the complaint was not culpable or willful. Furthermore,
setting aside the default would not prejudice the Plaintiff, as she will still be
able to pursue her claim. Notably, the Plaintiff does not oppose setting aside
the default. (Mot., ECF No. 16 at ¶ 5.)
Lastly, the Defendants indicate that they have several meritorious
defenses, including disputing the number of hours the Plaintiff worked, the

length of her employment, and whether they are subject to the Fair Labor
Standards Act. The defenses raised provide a “hint of a suggestion” that the
Defendants’ case has merit Rodriguez v. Brim’s Food, Inc., No. 13-cv-20600,
2013 WL 314748, at *3 (S.D. Fla. June 19, 2013) (Cooke, J.).
Accordingly, the Court grants the Defendants’ motion to set aside the
clerk’s default (ECF No. 16). The Defendants must file their responses to the
complaint by April 18, 2018. Furthermore, the parties are ordered to submit
their joint discovery plan and conference report no later than May 9, 2018, in
accordance with the Court’s February 27, 2018, Order (ECF No. 5).
Done and ordered at Miami, Florida, on April 12, 2018.

________________________________
Robert N. Scola, Jr.
United States District Judge