Adams v. Regional Credit Solutions, Inc. et al
Filing
11
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 10 Motion for Entry of Default. Entry of Default is hereby entered against Defendants Scudder and Northern Resolution Group, LLC. Entry of Default is denied as to Defendant Regional Credit Solutions, Inc. Signed by Julie A. Richards, Clerk of Court on 5/22/2013. (Sawyer, D.)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION
No. 5:13-CV-128-D
TAKISHA ADAMS,
Plaintiff,
v.
REGIONAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC.,
et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ORDER
On February 21, 2013, Takisha Adams ("plaintiff') filed this action against defendants
Regional Credit Solutions, Inc. ("Regional"), William Scudder ("Scudder"), and Northern
Resolution Group, LLC ("Northern") [D.E. 1].
On April 23, 2013, plaintiff moved for entry of
default against each defendant [D.E. 10]. For the reasons stated, plaintiffs motion for entry of
default is granted in part and denied in part [D.E. 10].
Rule 55( a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides for entry of default against a
party who "has failed to plead or otherwise defend." According to plaintiff, Northern was served
with summons and the complaint on February 25, 2013 [D.E. 7], and service of process was
perfected as to Scudder on March 4, 2013 [D.E. 8]. Northern and Scudder have failed to answer or
otherwise respond to plaintiffs complaint. Accordingly, plaintiffs motion for entry of default
against defendants William Scudder and Northern Resolution Group, LLC is GRANTED [D.E. 10].
As for Regional, plaintiff did not file a return of service or otherwise demonstrate that this
defendant was served with summons and the complaint. Thus, plaintiffs motion for entry of default
against defendant Regional Credit Solutions, Inc. is DENIED [D.E. 10].
tJ,
SO ORDERED. This'}) day of May 2013.
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?