BUFORD v. CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD U.S., INC. et al

Filing 42

ORDER granting 35 Motion for Leave to File-CCS is given seven days from the date of this order to file an answer or other response and denying 30 Motion for Clerk's Entry of Default. Signed by Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker on 11/30/2017. (CBU)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
INDINAR BUFORD,
Plaintiff,
v.
CUSHMAN & WAKEFIELD U.S., INC.,
CASTLETON PARK INDIANAPOLIS, LP,
CASTLETON PARK INDIANAPOLIS
MANAGEMENT, LLC,
KIMBERLY-CLARK CORPORATION,
CORPORATE CLEANING SYSTEMS, INC.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 1:17-cv-2125-TAB-SEB

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN ANSWER
AND DENYING MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT
Plaintiff Indinar Buford moved for an entry of default. Before the Clerk made the entry,
Defendant Corporate Cleaning Systems, Inc. requested leave to file an answer to Buford’s first
amended complaint. For the reasons noted below, the Court grants CCS’s motion for leave to
file an answer to Buford’s first amended complaint [Filing No. 35] and denies as moot Buford’s
motion for entry of default. [Filing No. 30.]
The Court has a strong preference for deciding suits on their merits. While circumstances
may justify resolving cases by default, the facts here do not rise to that level. CCS submitted an
affidavit from its interim president, Kenneth Dario, showing internal confusion regarding a
tender of defense of a co-defendant and whether CCS or its insurance company was responsible
for answering the complaint. [Filing No. 39, at ECF p. 3, ¶¶ 13–14; Filing No. 40, at ECF pp. 2–
3.] CCS submitted its motion for leave to file an answer eight days after Buford served his

motion for default. 1 Additionally, CCS requested leave only until November 3, 2017, to file its
answer. [Filing No. 35, at ECF p. 2, ¶ 6.] Furthermore, a default judgment would be ill advised
because CCS’s reply brief outlines a number of reasons why liability in this matter is not a
foregone conclusion. [Filing No. 39, at ECF p. 5, ¶ 22.]
Therefore, the Court grants CCS’s motion. [Filing No. 35.] CCS is given seven days
from the date of this order to file an answer or other response. As a result, the Court denies
Buford’s motion [Filing No. 30] as moot.
Date: 11/30/2017

_______________________________
Tim A. Baker
United States Magistrate Judge
Southern District of Indiana

Distribution: All counsel of record by email.

1

Buford filed its motion for default on October 4, 2017, [Filing No. 38, at ECF p. 2, ¶ 7] and
served CCS with a copy on October 12, 2017. [Filing No. 39, at ECF p. 3, ¶ 12.] CCS filed its
motion on October 20, 2017. [Filing No. 35.]
2