Bristol v. Hughes et al
Filing
80
ORDER Granting 76 Motion for Default Judgment. DEFAULT JUDGMENT in favor of Counter-Claimant Elizabeth Joan Hughes against Counter-Defendant Gabriel M. Bristol. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 3/13/2023. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TRW)
78 Filed 03/13/23
03/12/23 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:16-cv-00705-JCM-CWH Document 80
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
8
9
10
11
12
13
GABRIEL M. BRISTOL, an individual,
Plaintiff,
v.
Defendant.
ELIZABETH JOAN HUGHES, an individual,
Counter-Claimant,
16
17
18
19
v.
GABRIEL M. BRISTOL, an individual,
Counter-Defendant.
20
21
22
23
JUDGMENT AGAINST
COUNTER-DEFENDANT GABRIEL
BRISTOL
ELIZABETH JOAN HUGHES, an individual,
14
15
Case No.: 2:16-cv-00705-JCM-CWH
On February 3, 2023, Counter-Claimant ELIZABETH JOAN HUGHES, Motion for Default
Judgment against GABRIEL BRISTOL was filed with this Court. The time for a response has
24
passed After Considering all papers and evidence presented and entertaining arguments of counsel, the
25
court adopts Counter-Claimant's proposed order insofar as it appears below:
26
27
28
THEREFORE, on the Motion for Default Judgment, it is hereby ORDERED AND DECREED
as follows;
Order– 1
Case 2:16-cv-00705-JCM-CWH Document 80
78 Filed 03/13/23
03/12/23 Page 2 of 2
1
2
A.
THAT, the grounds for default are clearly established and the Clerk of Court properly
entered a default against the Counter-Defendant.
3
B.
THAT entry of Default Judgment is Warranted under Rule 55(b)(2).
4
C.
THAT Counter-Claimant has satisfied the Eitel factors as outlined in their Application for
5
Default Judgment; (1) the possibility of prejudice to the plaintiff; (2) the merits of the claim; (3) the
6
sufficiency of the complaint; (4) the amount of money at stake; (5) the possibility of a dispute concerning
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
material facts; (6) whether default was due to excusable neglect, and (7) the policy favoring a decision on
the merits. Eitel, 782 F.2d at 1471-72.
D.
THAT the Counter-Defendant is entitled to a monetary damage award in the amount of
Five Hundred Ninety Thousand, Three Hundred Nineteen Dollars and Eighty-Six Cents ($590,319.86).
E.
THAT the Counter-Defendant is entitled to an award of attorney’s fees in the amount to be
determined by further motion.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
IT IS SO ORDERED March13, 2023.
21
22
____________________________
Hon. James C. Mahan
United States District Judge
23
24
25
26
27
28
Order– 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?