Dawson Hanchey v. Blew Bayou Services, LLC

Hanchey · United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Fort Pierce Division · April 17, 2026 · No. 25-14334-CIV-MARTINEZ/MAYNARD

Summary

The document is a Report and Recommendation addressing Plaintiff Dawson Hanchey’s renewed motion for final default judgment against Blew Bayou Services, LLC. The magistrate judge recommends denying the motion without prejudice, vacating the clerk’s default, dismissing the complaint without prejudice, and permitting Plaintiff to file and serve an amended complaint. The recommendation rests on pleading deficiencies concerning ADA and FCRA disability discrimination and retaliation claims, as well as unsupported and inconsistent damages requests.

Court
United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Fort Pierce Division
Writing for the Court
Shanieek Mills Maynard
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Fort Pierce Division
Decision date
April 17, 2026
Docket number
25-14334-CIV-MARTINEZ/MAYNARD
Procedural posture
Report and recommendation on Plaintiff's renewed motion for entry of final default judgment after the Clerk entered default against Defendant for failure to appear or respond.
Standard of review
A motion for default judgment requires the court to determine whether the well-pleaded allegations establish a sufficient legal basis for liability, treating well-pleaded factual allegations as admitted but not legal conclusions. The court must independently determine damages based on competent evidence. A sua sponte dismissal for failure to state a claim requires notice and an opportunity to amend unless amendment would be futile or the complaint is patently frivolous.
Precedential value
unpublished
Parties
Dawson Hanchey v. Blew Bayou Services, LLC
Disposition
other

Topics

default judgmentdefaultpleadingsada / disabilityretaliation

Practice areas

civil procedureemployment lawdisability discriminationretaliationremedies

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Complaint's well-pleaded allegations established a sufficient legal basis for ADA and FCRA disability-discrimination claims for purposes of default judgment.
  2. Whether the Complaint's allegations established ADA and FCRA retaliation claims for purposes of default judgment.
  3. Whether Plaintiff provided a competent evidentiary basis for the requested back pay, emotional-distress damages, attorney's fees, and costs.
  4. Whether the Clerk's default should be vacated and the Complaint dismissed without prejudice with leave to amend rather than entering default judgment.

Holdings

  1. Default judgment may be entered only when the well-pleaded allegations of the complaint establish a sufficient legal basis for liability; a default does not entitle a plaintiff to judgment as a matter of right.
  2. The Complaint did not adequately plead disability-discrimination claims because it failed to provide factual support showing that Plaintiff was qualified to perform the essential functions of the position, that Defendant discriminated against him because of his disability, or that a requested medical leave was a sufficiently pleaded reasonable accommodation or was denied.
  3. The Complaint did not adequately plead retaliation because it failed to plausibly establish protected activity, the decisionmaker's knowledge of that activity, or a causal connection between protected activity and termination.
  4. Plaintiff failed to establish a competent and reliable evidentiary basis for back pay, emotional-distress damages, attorney's fees, and costs.
  5. The appropriate disposition was to deny the default-judgment motion without prejudice, vacate the Clerk's default, dismiss the Complaint without prejudice, and allow Plaintiff to file and serve an amended complaint curing the pleading deficiencies.

Key quotations

default judgments are generally disfavored. (4)
Conceptually, then, a motion for default judgment is like a reverse motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. (5)
Plaintiff cannot cure a deficiency in its Complaint through its Motion for Default Judgment. (12)

Factual background

Plaintiff alleged that he worked for Defendant as an apprentice lineman, became seriously ill while working in Georgia, requested medical leave as a reasonable accommodation, and was terminated after receiving medical clearance to return to work. The Complaint asserted ADA and FCRA disability-discrimination and retaliation claims. The pleading contained inconsistent allegations concerning Plaintiff's residence, the location of the employment and operative events, Defendant's business, and the alleged accommodation request, while Plaintiff's damages submissions contained unsupported and inconsistent calculations.

Procedural history

Plaintiff filed an action asserting disability-discrimination and retaliation claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act and parallel claims under the Florida Civil Rights Act. After Defendant failed to appear, the Clerk entered default. Plaintiff filed three motions for default judgment; the first two were denied without prejudice for procedural deficiencies, and the third was referred to the magistrate judge. The magistrate judge recommended denying the renewed motion without prejudice, vacating the Clerk's default, dismissing the Complaint without prejudice, and allowing Plaintiff to file and serve an amended complaint.

Remand instructions

The recommendation directs Plaintiff to file and properly serve an amended complaint within a specified time curing the identified deficiencies, after which Plaintiff may renew a motion for default judgment if the pleading and procedural requirements are satisfied.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…