United States of America v. Wright
Filing
8
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting 6 Motion for Default Judgment. Signed by District Judge Keith Starrett on 3/18/2016 (scp)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
EASTERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
V.
PLAINTIFF
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:15-CV-136-KS-MTP
VIVIAN L. WRIGHT
DEFENDANT
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
For the reasons provided below, the Court grants Plaintiff’s Motion for Default
Judgment [6].
Plaintiff filed its Complaint [1] on October 13, 2015. It contends that Defendant
is indebted to it in the amount of $71,515.14. Plaintiff provided a Certificate of
Indebtedness [1-1] executed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746(2), which provides that
Defendant executed a promissory note to secure a Direct Consolidation loan from the
U.S. Department of Education in the amount of $63,543.27 on March 22, 2004 at 3.00%
per annum. Pursuant to 34 C.F.R. § 685.202(b), $7,971.87 in unpaid interest was
capitalized and added to the principal balance. Defendant defaulted on the loan on
December 23, 2009. Plaintiff has received $6,801.00 in payments, and another
$7,375.18 in interest has accrued through September 4, 2015 – bringing the total debt
$78,890.32 as of that date.
By her default, Defendant admitted Plaintiff’s well-pleaded allegations of fact.
Nishimatsu Constr. Co. v. Houston Nat’l Bank, 515 F.2d 1200, 1206 (5th Cir. 1975). In
addressing a motion for default judgment, the Court accepts the factual allegations of
the Complaint as true. The entry of a default, however, “does not in itself warrant the
court in entering a default judgment. There must be a sufficient basis in the pleadings
for the judgment entered.” Id. “Default judgments are a drastic remedy, not favored by
the Federal Rules and resorted to by courts only in extreme situations.” Sun Bank of
Ocala v. Pelican Homestead & Sav. Ass’n, 874 F.2d 274, 276 (5th Cir. 1989).
Accepting the allegations of the Complaint as true, the Court finds that there
is sufficient basis to enter a default judgment against Defendant. Accordingly, the
Court awards Plaintiff $78,890.32 in principal damages; prejudgment interest at the
rate of 5.88% per annum from September 4, 2015, to the date of judgment;
postjudgment interest at the rate provided by 28 U.S.C. § 1961; and costs and fees as
provided by 28 U.S.C. § 2412. The Court will enter a separate final judgment.
SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED, on this, the 18th day of March, 2016.
s/ Keith Starrett
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?