CORRADI v. NEW JERSEY STATE PAROLE BOARD et al

Filing 55

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that Plaintiff's "Request for Summary Judgment" (ECF No. 31 ) is construed as a motion for default judgment against defendant South Plainfield Police Department under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b) and is D ENIED; that Plaintiff's subsequent motion for default judgment against defendant South Plainfield Police Department (ECF No. 48 ) is DENIED; that any claims asserted by Plaintiff against defendant South Plainfield Police Department are DISMISSED upon screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Signed by Judge Freda L. Wolfson on 2/21/2019. (mmh)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
_________________________________________
LOUIS CORRADI,
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
Civ. No. 16-5076 (FLW) (DEA)
:
v.
:
:
P.O. MICHELLE REY et al.,
:
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
:
Defendants.
:
_________________________________________ :

Plaintiff, Louis Corradi (“Corradi” or “Plaintiff”), is proceeding pro se with a Complaint
alleging civil-rights violations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1.) On November 28, 2017,
the Court permitted Corradi to proceed with claims for false arrest, false imprisonment, and
illegal search against defendants Kimberly Cavanaugh and Michelle Rey but dismissed the
remainder of Corradi’s claims. (See ECF No. 14.) Although Corradi subsequently moved to
amend his Complaint, he included no proposed amended pleading, and his motion was denied.
(See ECF Nos. 36, 45.)
Corradi has now filed a motion entitled “Request for Summary Judgment.” (ECF No.
31.) Although he purportedly seeks “summary judgment according the [sic] Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure 12,” the sole basis for judgment asserted in his two page motion is that the
United States Marshal Service served the Complaint upon defendant South Plainfield Police
Department on April 30, 2018, yet that defendant never responded. (Id.) Despite its label, this
motion must be construed as a motion for default judgment under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 55(b), and not a motion for summary judgment under Rule 56 or for any relief under
Rule 12.

Indeed, it appears that Corradi ultimately realized this issue, as he subsequently filed a
separate motion for default judgment against the South Plainfield Police Department. (ECF No.
48). This motion is substantively identical to the “Request for Summary Judgment” he
previously filed. (Id.)
Rule 55 discusses both an entry of default by the Clerk of the Court and an entry of
default judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a)–(b). “[E]ntry of default by the Clerk under Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 55(a) constitutes a general prerequisite for a subsequent default judgment
under Rule 55(b).” Husain v. Casino Control Comm’n, 265 F. App’x 130, 133 (3d Cir. 2008).
Corradi has never requested any entry of default by the Clerk, and none has ever been entered.
Accordingly, default judgment cannot be granted. Husain, 265 F. App’x at 133.
Furthermore, Corradi’s Complaint does not state any claims against the South Plainfield
Police Department. In the “List of Defendants” attached to the Complaint, Corradi did not list
the South Plainfield Police Department itself as a defendant, though he did list three individual
officers of that department. (ECF No. 1 at ECF p. 8.) The claims against those officers were
dismissed by the Court upon initial screening. (ECF No. 14.) Indeed, the only reason the South
Plainfield Police Department is listed as a defendant on the docket appears to be that it is
mentioned in the caption section of Corradi’s form Complaint. (ECF No. 1 at ECF p. 1.) The
Complaint never again mentions the police department as a defendant and includes no factual
allegations concerning it. (See ECF No. 1.) Accordingly, I again exercise my screening
authority under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) and dismiss any claims asserted against the South
Plainfield Police Department.
Accordingly, IT IS, on this 21st day of February 2019,

2

ORDERED that Plaintiff’s “Request for Summary Judgment” (ECF No. 31) is construed
as a motion for default judgment against defendant South Plainfield Police Department under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b) and is DENIED; and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s subsequent motion for default judgment against defendant
South Plainfield Police Department (ECF No. 48) is DENIED; and it is further
ORDERED that any claims asserted by Plaintiff against defendant South Plainfield
Police Department are DISMISSED upon screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) for failure
to state a claim upon which relief could be granted; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk shall serve this Memorandum and Order on Plaintiff by regular
U.S. mail.

s/Freda L. Wolfson
FREDA L. WOLFSON
United States District Judge

3