Woodmen of the World Life Insurance Society v. Weathersbee et al

Filing 127

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Woodmen of the World Life Insurance Company's Motion for Default Judgment (filing 126 ) is granted. A separate judgment will be entered. Ordered by Chief Judge John M. Gerrard. (LKO)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
WOODMEN OF THE WORLD LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANY, a Nebraska
Fraternal Benefit Society,

8:16-CV-498

Plaintiff,
vs.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

ROBERT WEATHERSBEE and MAXIE
BONDURANT,
Defendants.
This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Default Judgment
(filing 126) filed by Woodmen of the World Life Insurance Company with
respect to defaulted defendant Maxie Bondurant. The motion will be granted.
When a default judgment is entered, facts alleged in the complaint—
except as to damages—may not be later contested. Marshall v. Baggett, 616
F.3d 849, 852 (8th Cir. 2010); Murray v. Lene, 595 F.3d 868, 871 (8th Cir. 2010).
It remains for the Court to consider whether the unchallenged facts constitute
a legitimate cause of action, since a party in default does not admit mere
conclusions of law. Id. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the Court to ensure that
the unchallenged facts constitute a legitimate cause of action before entering
final judgment. Marshall, 616 F.3d at 852-53. And in most cases, even though
the allegations of the plaintiff's complaint are admitted, see id., it is still
necessary for the Court to determine the plaintiff's damages based upon the
evidence. See, Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2)(B); Brown v. Kenron Aluminum & Glass
Corp., 477 F.2d 526, 531 (8th Cir. 1973).
But here, both Woodmen's complaint and motion for default judgment
seek only injunctive relief enforcing the terms of its contract with Bondurant.

See filing 1 at 11; filing 126 at 2-3. And the Court has already applied the
Dataphase factors and concluded, early in these proceedings, that injunctive
relief was warranted by Woodmen's allegations. See filing 15. The Court has
also already considered whether Woodmen's complaint states a claim for relief,
and concluded that it does. See filing 60. So, Woodmen is entitled to a default
judgment as to Bondurant.
But, while the Court will enter judgment against Bondurant, the Court
will not order the permanent injunction requested by Woodmen. Woodmen's
motion, filed on November 26, 2018, asked the Court to enjoin Bondurant
"[t]hrough October 4, 2018." Filing 126 at 2-3. In other words, the injunction
Woodmen asks for would have expired before it was even requested. The Court
declines to enter such nugatory relief. The Court notes, however, that
Woodmen may still seek costs pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(d). See Rogers
Grp., Inc. v. City of Fayetteville, Ark., 683 F.3d 903, 910-11 (8th Cir. 2012).
IT IS ORDERED:
1.

Woodmen of the World Life Insurance Company's Motion for
Default Judgment (filing 126) is granted.

2.

A separate judgment will be entered.

Dated this 4th day of February, 2019.
BY THE COURT:

John M. Gerrard
Chief United States District Judge

-2-