ALFRED v. ATLANTIC CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT SWAT et al
Filing
47
OPINION FILED. Signed by Judge Robert B. Kugler on 9/23/15. (js)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
(Doc. Nos. 23 & 27)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
CAMDEN VICINAGE
___________________________________
:
Michelle ALFRED,
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
v.
:
:
ATLANTIC CITY POLICE
:
DEPARTMENT SWAT, et al.,
:
:
Defendants. :
___________________________________ :
Civil No. 14-7536 (RBK/JS)
OPINION
KUGLER, United States District Judge:
This action comes before the Court on pro se Plaintiff Michelle Alfred’s “Motion for
Default”1 against the City of Atlantic City,2 Rhonda Williams, Jason Holt, and Evelyn Wong
(“Atlantic City Defendants”) (Doc. No. 23) and “Motion for Default Judgment” against
Defendant David Castellani. (Doc. No. 27). Plaintiff’s motions are DENIED.
The clerk entered a default against the Atlantic City Defendants on January 23, 2015, and
against Defendant Castellani on February 6, 2015. Plaintiff filed these motions for default
judgment on March 18, 2015. However, Magistrate Judge Joel Schneider vacated the default
against Defendant Castellani on April 14, 2015, and he vacated the default against the Atlantic
City Defendants on April 15, 2015.
1
The Court will construe Plaintiff’s motion as a motion for default judgment under Federal Rule
of Procedure 55.
2
Plaintiff names “Atlantic City Police Department Swat.” The proper defendant is City of
Atlantic City.
1
The Court may only enter a default judgment pursuant to Rule 55(b)(2) against a
defendant who has been defaulted under Rule 55(a). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 55. Because Judge
Schneider vacated the defaults against the Atlantic City Defendants and Defendant Castellani,
those defendants are no longer in default. As such, Plaintiff’s motions are DENIED.
Dated:
09/23/2015
s/ Robert B. Kugler
ROBERT B. KUGLER
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?