Warner v. Delano

Summary

The court denied the plaintiff’s motion for default judgment in an action alleging disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act. Although the court adopted the magistrate judge’s recommended disposition on different grounds, it concluded that the record did not establish proper service of the amended complaint. The plaintiff was directed to complete proper service or amend the proof of service within 21 days, subject to dismissal without prejudice.

Holdings

1. The Court denied Plaintiff's motion for default judgment because the record did not establish proper service of the amended complaint.
2. A district court has discretion to deny default judgment, and default judgments are generally disfavored.
3. The proof of service was insufficient to establish substituted service because it did not show delivery to a person apparently in charge who was at least eighteen years old or subsequent mailing of the summons and complaint.

Questions Presented

1. Whether default judgment should be entered after the Clerk entered default.
2. Whether the record established that Delano was properly served with the amended complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(e) and California law.
3. Whether the Court should direct Plaintiff to complete proper service or amend the proof of service and warn that failure to do so would result in dismissal without prejudice under Rule 4(m).

Disposition

denied