J & J Sports Productions, Incorporated v. Herriman et al

Filing 20

ORDER GRANTING IN PART 16 MOTION for Default Judgment as to Cruisin1, Inc., only. Signed by District Judge Terrence G. Berg. (AChu)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
J & J SPORTS PRODUCTIONS,
INC.,
Plaintiff,
No. 4:17-cv-11155-TGB-DRG
Hon. Terrence G. Berg

v.
CRUISIN1, INC., AND
CHEYENNE HERRIMAN,
Individually, jointly and severally,
Defendants.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR
DEFAULT JUDGMENT AGAINST CRUISIN1, INC. ONLY
(DKT. 16)
This case involves the alleged willful interception and exhibition
of the pay-per-view event entitled Manny Pacquiao v. Timothy
Bradley, II WBO Welterweight Championship Fight Program by
Defendants for private financial gain without paying the requisite
commercial licensing fee. See, e.g., Dkt. 1 (complaint).
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment
against Defendant Cruisin1 Inc. Dkt. 16. Plaintiff is not seeking any
default judgment against co-defendant Cheyenne Herriman (also
known as Cheyenne Usewick). The record reflects Cruisin1 Inc. was
properly served with notice of this pending lawsuit through service on
its resident agent, Cheyenne Usewick, on July 3, 2017. Dkt. 9, Pg. ID

1

56; Dkt. 5-1, Pg. ID 27. Defendant Cruisin1 Inc. has failed to respond
to the complaint. On July 26, 2017, Plaintiff obtained a clerk’s entry
of default. Dkt. 12.
It is well established that once a default is entered against a
defendant, that party is deemed to have admitted all of the wellpleaded allegations in the complaint pertaining to liability. See Ford
Motor Co v. Cross, 441 F.Supp.2d 837, 846 (E.D. Mich. 2006) (citing
Matter of Visioneering Construction, 661 F.2d 119, 124 (6th Cir.
1981)).
On January 22, 2018 the Court held a hearing on Plaintiff’s
motion for default judgment; only counsel for Plaintiff appeared.
Although Plaintiff initially requested a judgment on liability and an
award of damages, the Court concluded that it would be appropriate
to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant
Cruisin1 Inc. on liability only at this time. This is because Plaintiff
has sought and been granted leave to amend its complaint, dismissing
Ms. Herriman and adding two new individual defendants who
Plaintiff believes may be liable. Because the complaint seeks joint and
several liability against all defendants, it would be proper to await
the determination of any amount of damages until after the litigation
regarding the additional defendants is completed.

2

Thus, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion for default
judgment against Defendant Cruisin1 Inc. on the issue of liability.
Judgment may be therefore entered in favor of Plaintiff and against
Defendant Cruisin1 on the issue of liability.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 23, 2018

s/Terrence G. Berg
TERRENCE G. BERG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Certificate of Service
I hereby certify that this Order was electronically filed, and the
parties and/or counsel of record were served on January 23, 2018.
s/A. Chubb
Case Manager

3