MANCUSO et al v. TYLER DANE, LLC

Filing 42

MEMORANDUM ORDER, Pltfs' Motion for Default Judgment 41 is granting in part and held in abeyance in part, etc. Signed by Judge Joseph H. Rodriguez on 5/1/2012. (dmr)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
____________________________
PATRICIA MARY MANCUSO &
:
ALFRED MANCUSO
:
:
Plaintiffs,
:
:
vs.
:
:
TYLER DANE, LLC d/b/a
:
ROD AND REEL TAVERN,
:
:
Defendants.
:
____________________________:

Civil Action No. 08-5311 (JHR)

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Presently before the Court is the motion [Dkt. Entry No. 42] of Plaintiffs Patricia
Mary Mancuso and Alfred Mancuso (“Mancuso”) for default judgment against
Defendant Tyler Dane, LLC, d/b/a Rod and Reel Tavern (“Dane”) pursuant to FED . R.
CIV. P. 55. For the reasons set forth below, Mancuso’s motion for default judgment will
be granted, but the Court reserves decision on its determination of damages.
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Plaintiffs Mary and Alfred Mancuso filed a complaint against defendant Tyler
Dane, LLC in this Court on October 24, 2010. Plaintiffs, Mary and Alfred are wife and
husband and citizens of the Pennsylvania. (Compl. ¶ 3.) Defendant, Tyler Dane, LLC, is
a New Jersey limited liability company doing business as the Rod and Reel Tavern, with
a place of business located at 1301 E. Beach Avenue, Brigantine, NJ 08203. (Id. at ¶ 6.)
Plaintiffs allege that Patricia tripped and fell over a misplaced railroad tie located in an
unlit walkway on Defendant’s premises. (Id. at ¶ 7.) Plaintiffs further allege that Patricia
suffered serious and permanent injuries as a result of her fall, the medical records of
which were submitted to the court. (Id.)

The Complaint and Summons were served on Defendant on November 20, 2008.
The Court notified Plaintiffs by letter dated November 17, 2008 that the Complaint
failed to properly plead the statutory requirements for diversity of citizenship and
Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint on December 10, 2008. Defendant never
answered the Amended Complaint and the Clerk entered default on June 4, 2009.
Plaintiffs filed this unopposed Motion for Default Judgment on October 25, 2010. In a
previous Order, the Court directed Plaintiffs to submit proof of service of the Amended
Complaint no later than December 9, 2010 and set a hearing date for December 16, 2010
to determine the propriety of default judgment, as to both liability and damages [Dkt.
Entry No. 19]. In response, Plaintiffs submitted certification that the Amended
Complaint was served upon the Defendant by mail on December 7, 2010 [Dkt. Entry No.
21]. A request for default judgment filed on March 10, 2011 was denied due to improper
service. [Dkt. Entry No. 25.] Following proper service on November 30, 2011, another
motion for default judgment as to liability was filed on February 10, 2012. [Dkt. Entry
No. 41.]
II. JURISDICTION
Diversity jurisdiction over Mancuso’s federal law claim is conferred by 28 U.S.C.
§ 1332, because complete diversity exists. The Plaintiffs are Pennsylvania citizens, and
the Defendant is a New Jersey corporation with its principle place of business located in
Brigantine, New Jersey. The Plaintiffs are requesting damages in excess of $75,000.
This Court exercises personal jurisdiction over Dane because service of process on Dane
was proper and its principal place of business is in New Jersey.

2

III. STANDARD OF REVIEW
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 governs a court’s decision to enter default
judgment against a defendant. See FED . R. CIV. P. 55. To obtain default judgment, the
plaintiff must have properly served the defendant with the summons and complaint in
the matter. Lampe v. Xouth, Inc., 952 F.2d 697, 700-701 (3d Cir. 1991). Pursuant to
Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a corporation may be served process “by
delivering a copy of the summons and of the complaint to an officer, a managing or
general agent, or any other agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service
of process.” FED . R. CIV. P. 4(h)(1)(B).
Obtaining default judgment against a defendant is a two-step process. First, the
Clerk of the Court must enter the defendant’s default after the properly served
defendant has failed to plead or otherwise defend himself. FED . R. CIV. P. 55(a).
Second, on the plaintiff’s request, the Clerk may enter default judgment against the
defendant for the amount and costs the plaintiff requests if the plaintiff’s claim is for a
sum certain or a sum that can be made certain by computation. FED . R. CIV. P. 55(b)(1).
In all other cases, the plaintiff must apply to the court for a default judgment. FED . R.
CIV. P. 55(b)(2).
The plaintiff’s unchallenged facts set forth in the complaint must establish a
legitimate cause of action before default judgment can be entered. DirecTV, Inc. v.
Decroce, 332 F.Supp.2d 715, 717 (D.N.J. 2004), rev’d on other grounds sub. nom.
DirecTV, Inc. v. Pepe, 431 F.3d 162 (3d Cir. 2005). A plaintiff is not entitled to entry of
default judgment against a defendant as of right, because the entry of such judgment is
to the discretion of the district court. Hritz v. Woma Corp., 732 F.2d 1178, 1180 (3d Cir.
3

1984). However, the Third Circuit prefers that “cases be disposed of on the merits
whenever practicable.” Id. at 1181.
Three criteria inform the Court’s decision of whether default judgment is
appropriate: (1) whether the plaintiff would suffer prejudice if the default judgment
were denied, (2) whether the defendant has a meritorious defense, and (3) whether the
defendant’s own culpable conduct caused his delay in responding to the Complaint. See
Chamberlain v. Giampapa, 210 F.3d 154, 164 (3d Cir. 2000).
Courts must accept the plaintiff’s well-pleaded factual allegations as true, but
need not accept the plaintiff’s factual allegations regarding damages as true. Chanel,
Inc. v. Gordashevsky, 558 F.Supp.2d 532, 536 (D.N.J. 2008) (citing Comdyne I, Inc. v.
Corbin, 908 F.2d 1142, 1149 (3d Cir. 1990). In the absence of sufficient evidentiary
support, the Court may order or permit the plaintiff to provide additional evidence to
support his or her allegations. See, e.g., Rose Containerline, Inc. v. Omega Shipping Co.,
Inc., Civil No. 10-4345, 2011 WL 1564637, at *3 (D.N.J. Apr. 25, 2011) (ordering the
plaintiff to “provide the Court with additional clarifying information to justify the
damages sought”); Bridges Fin. Group, Inc. v. Beech Hill Co., Inc., Civil No. 09-2686,
2011 WL 1485435, at *5 (D.N.J. Apr. 18, 2011) (permitting the plaintiff to “file
supplemental documentation regarding its claim for interest and reasonable attorneys’
fees and costs”). The Court may also conduct hearings to ascertain the amount of
damages owed to the plaintiff. FED . R. CIV. P. 55(b)(2).
However, the Court is not required to conduct such hearings “as long as it ensures
that there is a basis for the damages specified in the default judgment.” Trucking
Employees of North Jersey Welfare Fund, Inc.-Pension Fund v. Caliber Auto Transfer,
4

Inc., Civil No. 08-2782, 2009 WL 3584358, at *3 (D.N.J. Oct. 27, 2009) (quoting
Transatlantic Marine Claims Agency, Inc. v. Ace Shipping Corp., 109 F.3d 105, 111 (2d
Cir. 1997)). For example, courts have held that hearings are unnecessary where
“detailed affidavits and documentary evidence” have been submitted to support the
plaintiff’s claim for damages. See Tamarin v. Adam Caterers, 13 F.3d 51, 54 (2d Cir.
1993). Additionally, if the damages are for a “sum certain or for a sum which can by
computation be made certain, a further evidentiary inquiry is not necessary and a
district court may enter final judgment.” Bds. of Trs. of the Operating Eng’rs Local 825
Welfare Fund v. Robert Silagy Landscaping, Inc., Civil No. 06-1795, 2006 U.S. Dist.
LEXIS 82475, at *9 (D.N.J. Nov. 9, 2006).
IV. DISCUSSION
Propriety of Entry of Default Judgment
The Court finds that the Clerk’s Office properly entered default, because the
service of process on Dane was proper. On November 30, 2011, Tom Devine, a person
authorized to accept the service, was personally served and accepted the Summons and
Complaint in this matter. The service was properly conducted by The Atlantic County
Sheriff’s Office through Albert Thompson, Sheriff’s Officer. FED . R. CIV. P. 4(c)(3).
In addition, consideration of the default criteria weigh in favor of default
judgment. Plaintiffs would suffer prejudice if default judgment were denied, due to the
fact that they have no other remedy against Defendant. Second, because Defendant has
failed to answer, there does not appear to be a meritorious defense to Plaintiffs’ claims.
The Court is unable to assess whether Defendant’s own culpable conduct caused delay in
responding to the Complaint. Therefore, entry of default judgment with respect to
5

liability only is appropriate at this time. See LaBracio Family Partnership v. 1239
Roosevelt Ave., Inc. 340 N.J. Super 155, 161, 773 A.2d 1209, 1212 (App. Div. 2001)
(“Under New Jersey law, the principles of negligence are well settled. The requisite
elements of a negligence cause of action are: (1) the existence of a duty; (2) the breach of
that duty; and (3) proximate causation of damages.”).
The Court reserves decision on damages because Plaintiffs lack sufficient
evidentiary support to justify their damages. Since the inception of this case, nearly five
years ago, Plaintiffs have never offered any proof of monetary damages. Instead,
Plaintiffs recently submitted hospital reports and medical records. The Court requires
submission of quantifiable, specific damages. After a review of the submissions, the
Court will determine whether an evidentiary hearing is needed. As a result, the Court
cannot compute Plaintiffs’ damages or the extent to which injunctive relief should be
granted.
V. CONCLUSION
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment [Dkt. No. 41.] is granted in part as to
liability and held in abeyance in part; the Court reserves decision on the determination
of damages. Plaintiff SHALL provide the Court with additional information justifying
the damages they seek consistent with this ORDER no later than May 14, 2012.
It is so ORDERED on this 1st day of May, 2012.

/s/ Joseph H. Rodriguez
JOSEPH H. RODRIGUEZ,
United States District Judge
6

7