United States of America v. Warnick

Filing 27

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION DKT. NO. 25 , GRANTING PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT DKT. NO. 21 , AND AWARDING JUDGMENT TO PLAINTIFF; United States is awarded $84,136.09 pre and post-judgment interest and all cost incurred by the United States. Signed by District Judge Irene M. Keeley on 4/3/2014. (Copy counsel of record via CM/ECF, pro se defendant via certified mail)(jmm) (Additional attachment(s) added on 4/3/2014: # 1 Certified Mail Return Receipt) (jmm).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.

//

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:12CV154
(Judge Keeley)

LANNIE F. WARNICK,
Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [DKT. NO. 25],
GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
[DKT. NO. 21], AND AWARDING JUDGMENT TO PLAINTIFF
Pending before the Court are the motion for summary judgment
or, in the alternative, judgment on the pleadings (dkt. no. 21)
filed by the plaintiff, the United States of America (the “United
States”), and the report and recommendation (“R&R”) (dkt. no. 25)
entered by the Honorable John S. Kaull, United States Magistrate
Judge, on December 3, 2013, recommending that the Court grant the
United States’ motion.

For the reasons that follow, the Court

ADOPTS the R&R in its entirety, GRANTS the United States’ motion,
and AWARDS judgment to the United States.
On September 27, 2012, the United States filed a complaint in
this Court demanding judgment against the defendant, Lannie F.
Warnick (“Warnick”), for an amount allegedly owed to the United
States by Warnick as a result of her failure to comply with the
terms of a scholarship award.

The United States alleges that, on

September 30, 1993, Warnick was awarded a scholarship through the
National

Health

Services

Corps

(“NHCS”)

in

the

amount

of

USA V. WARNICK

1:12CV154

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [DKT. NO. 25],
GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
[DKT. NO. 21], AND AWARDING JUDGMENT TO PLAINTIFF
$62,664.00.

The scholarship was to cover tuition, fees, stipends,

and other reasonable educational expenses for four years from 1993
to 1997.
At the time she received the scholarship, Warnick was enrolled
in a physician assistant program at Alderson-Broaddus College in
Philippi, West Virginia.

The terms of the scholarship required

Warnick to serve four years in the full time clinical practice of
her profession in the regular or reserve corps of the United States
Public Health Service or as a civilian member of the NHCS.
On January 14, 1996, Warnick advised the NHCS program office
that she had been dismissed from the Alderson-Broaddus physician
assistant program. The NHCS informed her that failure to re-enroll
in a comparable program within one year would violate the terms of
her scholarship.

Warnick did not re-enroll, and, on August 25,

1997, the NHCS informed her that she was in default of the terms of
the scholarship and that interest would be assessed if payment in
full was not made within three years.
Several attempts by the United States to craft a viable
repayment plan, and Warnick’s consistent failure to comply with the
terms of repayment, culminated in this complaint.

On November 7,

2012, Warnick, appearing pro se, filed an answer in the form of a
2

USA V. WARNICK

1:12CV154

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [DKT. NO. 25],
GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
[DKT. NO. 21], AND AWARDING JUDGMENT TO PLAINTIFF
letter advising the NHCS that she was unable to pay her debt.

The

Court referred the case to Magistrate Judge Kaull.
On September 26, 2013, the United States filed a motion for
summary judgment or, in the alternative, judgment on the pleadings,
to which Warnick did not respond.

On December 3, 2013, Magistrate

Judge Kaull entered an R&R in which he found no material facts in
dispute and recommended granting the United States’ motion and
awarding judgment in the sum of the following:
•

$84,136.09;

•

Pre-judgment interest at the rate of 13.75% per annum on
the principal amount of $62,664.00 that has accrued and
will continue to accrue from and after September 17, 2012
through the date of judgment;

•

Post-judgment interest pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a) at
the legal rate until paid in full; and

•

All costs incurred by the United States.

Warnick did not object to the R&R, and the Court finds no
clear

error

in

Magistrate

Judge

Kaull’s

findings

and

recommendation. See Phillips v. Haynes, 5:06CV20, 2006 WL 1303103,
*1

(N.D.W.

Va.,

May

10,

2006)

(“As

to

those

portions

of

a

recommendation to which no objection is made, a magistrate judge’s
3

USA V. WARNICK

1:12CV154

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [DKT. NO. 25],
GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
[DKT. NO. 21], AND AWARDING JUDGMENT TO PLAINTIFF
findings and recommendation will be upheld unless they are ‘clearly
erroneous.’”).

Moreover, the facts alleged in the United States

complaint are undisputed.

See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S.

317, 322 (1986) (placing the burden on the non-moving party to
“establish the existence of an element essential to that party’s
case” to rebut the moving party’s showing that no genuine factual
dispute exists); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e)(2).

According to

the Certificate of Indebtedness (dkt. no. 2-2), as of September 17,
2012, Warnick owed a principal amount of $62,664.00 plus $21,472.09
in interest.

Since then, interest has accrued on the principal at

13.75% per annum.
For these reasons, the Court ADOPTS the R&R, GRANTS the United
States’ motion for summary judgment, and AWARDS the United States
the sum of the following:
•

$84,136.09;

•

Pre-judgment interest at the rate of 13.75% per annum on
the principal amount of $62,664.00 that has accrued and
will continue to accrue from and after September 17, 2012
through the date of judgment;

•

Post-judgment interest pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a) at
the legal rate until paid in full; and
4

USA V. WARNICK

1:12CV154

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [DKT. NO. 25],
GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
[DKT. NO. 21], AND AWARDING JUDGMENT TO PLAINTIFF
•

All costs incurred by the United States.

It is so ORDERED.
The Court directs the Clerk to enter a separate judgment order
and to transmit copies of this order to counsel of record and the
pro se defendant, return receipt requested.
DATED: April 3, 2014.
/s/ Irene M. Keeley
IRENE M. KEELEY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

5