Strickland v. Chambers et al

Filing 25

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS that the 21 Motion for entry of default should be de nied re 1 Complaint filed by Antonio Lamar Strickland. Objections to R&R due by 6/20/2024. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 6/3/24. (wwp)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA DUBLIN DIVISION ANTONIO LAMAR STRICKLAND, Plaintiff, v. WARDEN BRIAN CHAMBERS and DEPUTY WARDEN TRAVIS PROSSER, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CV 323-098 MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff, an inmate at Ware State Prison in Waycross, Georgia, brought the abovecaptioned civil case and is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion1 for entry of default. (Doc. no. 21.) Because Plaintiff’s motion is baseless, the Court REPORTS and RECOMMENDS Plaintiff’s motion be DENIED. Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a), a party is entitled to entry of default when it has shown an adverse party has failed to plead or otherwise defend against a complaint through affidavit or otherwise. Entry of default against Defendants Chambers and Prosser is not warranted because they timely responded to Plaintiff’s complaint. On April 30, 2024, the Court granted Defendants an extension of time through and including May 31, 2024, to respond to Plaintiff’s complaint. (Doc. no. 19.) Defendants timely filed their answer in accordance with this The Court acknowledges Plaintiff titled his filing “Declaration for Entry of Default.” (See doc. no. 21, p. 1.) However, liberally construing Plaintiff’s filing, the Court finds it is appropriately construed as a motion for entry of default. Accordingly, the Court DIRECTS the CLERK to update the docket text to reflect the filing at doc. no. 21 is a Motion for Entry of Default and REFER the same to the undersigned. Plaintiff is advised that “if a litigant seeks judicial action of any sort . . . it must be contained within a motion arising from a properly filed lawsuit.” In re Unsolicited Letters to Federal Judges, 120 F. Supp. 2d 1073, 1074 (S.D. Ga. 2000). 1 extended deadline. (Doc. no. 23.) Accordingly, entry of default against Defendants is not appropriate because they have not failed to plead or otherwise defend against Plaintiff’s complaint as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Thus, the Court REPORTS and RECOMMENDS Plaintiff’s motion for entry of default be DENIED. (Doc. no. 21.) SO REPORTED and RECOMMENDED this 3rd day of June, 2024, at Augusta, Georgia. 2

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?