Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington denied Stoddard Brothers LLC’s motion for default judgment against PNWCM LLC, Douglas Konold, and Angela Konold, with leave to renew. The court found that additional evidence was needed to support the alleged loans, joint venture, payments, correspondence, and damages before entering a judgment involving approximately $1.99 million.
Holdings
- Default judgment was denied because, although several Eitel factors favored judgment, the requested award was substantial and the record required additional evidence concerning the alleged joint venture, loans, rental payments, and related transactions.
- A party seeking default judgment under Rule 55 must first obtain entry of default and then apply for default judgment, satisfying the applicable declaration or affidavit requirements.
Questions Presented
- Whether the court should enter default judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 after the defendants failed to appear.
- Whether the record and plaintiff's supporting evidence sufficiently established the merits of the claims and the amount of damages to justify default judgment.
- Whether additional evidence was necessary before entering a default judgment for the substantial amount requested.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (14)
- Westchester Fire Ins. Co. v. Mendez, 585 F.3d 1183, 1189 (9th Cir. 2009)(followed)
- Cmty. Dental Servs. v. Tani, 282 F.3d 1164, 1170 (9th Cir. 2002)(followed)
- Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir. 1986)(followed)
- Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Contractors Nw. Inc., 2020 WL 5848663, at *3 (E.D. Wash. Oct. 1, 2020)(followed)
- Curtis v. Illumination Arts, Inc., 33 F. Supp. 3d 1200, 1212-13 (W.D. Wash. 2014)(followed)
- Landstar Ranger, Inc. v. Parth Enter., Inc., 725 F. Supp. 2d 916, 921-22 (N.D. Cal. 2010)(followed)
- Microsoft Corp. v. Lopez, 2009 WL 959219, at *3 (W.D. Wash. Apr. 7, 2009)(followed)
- Derek Andrew, Inc. v. Poof Apparel Corp., 528 F.3d 696, 702 (9th Cir. 2008)(followed)
- Resol. Tr. Corp. v. First Am. Bank, 155 F.3d 1126, 1129 (9th Cir. 1998)(followed)
- In re Cardelucci, 285 F.3d 1231, 1235 (9th Cir. 2002)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 14.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…