Progressive Express Insurance Company v. Enrique Augusto Urdaneta, Joseph Reed Ubele, and The Minato Group, LLC

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida denied Joseph Reed Ubele’s motion to set aside the clerk’s default, order on default, and default final judgment. The court held that federal law governed the default analysis, Ubele was properly served, and communications with counsel did not require vacatur. The court also found that Ubele’s failure to forward the served documents to his attorneys constituted internal communication and oversight rather than excusable neglect.

Holdings

1. Federal law governs the default-judgment analysis in a federal court sitting in diversity jurisdiction; therefore, Ubele's reliance on Florida default procedure was misplaced.
2. The clerk's default was properly entered because Ubele was personally served with the summons and complaint, failed to respond, and was served with the motion for clerk's default in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55.
3. Ubele failed to establish excusable neglect or good cause warranting relief from the default or default judgment because his failure to notify his attorneys after personal service was an internal communication failure and oversight, not excusable neglect.
4. Progressive was not required to provide notice of the lawsuit to attorneys who had not entered an appearance because Ubele himself was properly served under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(e).

Questions Presented

1. Whether Florida law governed the effect of communications between Ubele's counsel and Progressive's counsel on the federal default procedure.
2. Whether Ubele's default and resulting judgment should be set aside under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) based on excusable neglect or extraordinary circumstances.
3. Whether Ubele established good cause to vacate the clerk's default after being personally served and failing to respond.

Disposition

other