Direct Line Corporation v. Carrington et al

Filing 13

DENIAL OF ENTRY OF DEFAULT: Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Default 10 is Denied. Defendant is advised that he must promptly answer the allegations in the Complaint against him. If the service date is taken to be 6/14/2010, as stated by Defend ant in his response, then the time for Defendant to file an Answer will expire on 7/5/2010. If Defendant has not filed an Answer by that date, Plaintiff may file a renewed motion for entry of default. Signed by Clerk of Court, Keith Throckmorton on 6/28/10. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(dt)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION Direct Line Corporation, Plaintiff, v. Michael L. Carrington, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 3:10-cv-0423 Judge Trauger

DENIAL OF ENTRY OF DEFAULT Pending is Plaintiff's Motion for Entry of Default against Defendant (Docket Entry No. 10). Defendant has filed an "Answer to Motion for Entry of Default" (Docket Entry No. 12). In his response, Defendant states he never received the service of summons and that he no longer resides at the address to which it was sent. No default will be entered under these circumstances at the present time. Defendant is advised that he must promptly answer the allegations in the Complaint against him. If the service date is taken to be June 14, 2010, as stated by Defendant in his response, then the time for Defendant to file an Answer will expire on July 5, 2010. If Defendant has not filed an Answer by that date, Plaintiff may file a renewed motion for entry of default. Plaintiff's motion is denied for the reasons stated above. s/ Keith Throckmorton Keith Throckmorton Clerk of Court

1