Ashmore v. Williams
Filing
12
ORDER AND OPINION granting 9 Motion for Default Judgment. Signed by Honorable Margaret B Seymour on 7/25/2013.(asni, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
COLUMBIA DIVISION
Beattie B. Ashmore, In His Capacity as
Court-Appointed Receiver for the Three
Hebrew Boys,
Plaintiff,
vs.
George Williams,
Defendant.
)
) C/A No. 3:13-1015-MBS
)
)
)
)
)
)
ORDER
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff Beattie B. Ashmore, in his capacity as court-appointed Receiver for the Three
Hebrew Boys, filed a complaint on April 15, 2013, alleging that Defendant George Williams profited
in the amount of $137,614.74 as the result of participating in a fraudulent investment scheme
perpetrated by Tony Pough, Joseph Brunson, and Timothy McQueen, also known as the “Three
Hebrew Boys.” Plaintiff asserts causes of action for fraudulent transfer, unjust enrichment,
imposition of an equitable mortgage/deed of trust, constructive/resulting trust, and equitable lien.
The summons and complaint were served on Defendant on April 18, 2013. Defendant did not plead
or otherwise defend against the allegations of the complaint. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 55.
On June 14, 2013, Plaintiff requested entry of default. The Clerk of Court entered default
the same day. The request for entry of default and Clerk’s entry of default were served on Defendant
on June 17, 2013. Also on June 17, 2013, Plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment and served
a copy of the motion on Defendant the same day. Defendant has not responded to the entry of
default or motion for default judgment.
Therefore, in accordance with Rule 55(b)(2), IT IS ORDERED that judgment be entered in
favor of Plaintiff in the amount of $137,614.74, plus interest at the legal rate. The court is informed
that Plaintiff waives his request for attorneys’ fees and costs.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Margaret B. Seymour
Senior United States District Judge
Columbia, South Carolina
July 25, 2013
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?