Shipman v. Marlo Enterprises, Inc. et al

Filing 19

ORDER dismissing as moot 18 Motion for Default Judgment. The Clerk's entries of default as to Defendants Marlo re 11 Clerk's ENTRY OF DEFAULT and Reed re 17 Clerk's ENTRY OF DEFAULT are VACTATED. Plaintiff is Ordered to re-serve re 15 Amended Complaint at the correct address. Plaintiff may seek a Clerk's entry of default and default judgment. Signed by Judge William T. Moore, Jr on 4/18/2016. (loh)

-

FILED
U.S. OISTPJCI COURT
SAVANNAH DIV.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ZUI6APR 18 AM 10:57
SAVANNAH DIVISION

CHEREE SHIPMAN,

)

CLERI

DIS T

A.

•

Plaintiff,
V

CASE NO. CV414-052

.

MARLO ENTERPRISES, INC. dibla
Collection Concepts, Inc., and
MARTIN REED,
Defendants.
ORD ER
Before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment
(Doc. 18), to which there has been no response. In this motion,
Plaintiff requests a default judgment against Defendants Marlo
Enterprises, Inc. ("Mario") and Martin Reed. (Doc. 18.) For the
following reasons, Plaintiff's motion is DISMISSED AS MOOT.
Plaintiff initially filed this suit on March 14, 2014.
(Doc. 1.) On May 9, 2014, Defendants filed a Motion for
Extension of Time (Doc. 7) in order to seek an attorney. This
motion was granted. (Doc. 8.) On July 11, 2014, Defendants filed
a Motion to Dismiss' (Doc. 9) to which Plaintiff responded by
requesting an opportunity to amend her complaint (Doc. 12 at 6).

1

The Court recognizes that Defendants' motion suffered from
numerous substantive and procedural deficiencies including that
the motion was filed out of time by a non-attorney purporting to
represent both the individual and corporate defendants in this
action. (Doc. 13 at 2.)

On July 14, 2014, a clerk's entry of default was entered as to
Defendant Mario. (Doc. 11.) On February 9, 2015, the Court
granted Plaintiff's request to amend and ordered that Plaintiff
file an amended complaint. (Doc. 13.) On February 10, 2015,
Plaintiff filed her amended complaint. (Doc. 15.) Defendants
never responded to the amended complaint. On April 29, 2015, a
Clerk's Entry of Default was entered as to Defendant Reed. (Doc.
17.) On October 13, 2015, Plaintiff filed the Motion for Default
Judgment presently before the Court. (Doc. 18.)
There appear to be multiple issues with this case, chief
among them is the fact that the amended complaint and motion for
default judgment seem to have been served at the wrong address815 Forest Park Drive—rather than 6815 Forest Park Drive. (Doc.
15 at 9; Doc. 18 at 3.) Additionally, a clerk's entry of default
was entered as to Defendant Mario after Defendants had filed a
Motion for an Extension of TIme (Doc. 7) and a Motion to Dismiss
(Doc. 9). Moreover, the clerk's entry of default as to Mario was
entered prior to Plaintiff filing her amended complaint. Given
the confused procedural posture of this case, the Court
concludes that entering default at this time would be premature.
As a result, the Clerk's entries of default as to Defendants
Mario (Doc. 11) and Reed (Doc. 17) are
Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 18)

VACATED.

Plaintiff's

is accordingly DISMISSED

AS MOOT. Plaintiff is ORDERED to re-serve the Amended Complaint
2

(Doc. 15) at the correct address. Should the Defendants fail to
respond, Plaintiff may seek a clerk's entry of default and
default judgment.
7*'

SO ORDERED this /lc1a y of April 2016.

WILLIAM T. MOORE, JR.,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

3