Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Castillo v. Integrity Financial Solutions, LLC

United States District Court, W.D. Michigan

May 1, 2018

Tammy Castillo, Plaintiff,
v.
United Mediation Services L.L.C., et al., Defendants.

          HON. JANET T. NEFF JUDGE.

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          ELLEN S. CARMODY U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

         This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Revised Application for Default Judgment (ECF No. 24), which was referred to the undersigned by the Honorable Janet T. Neff for report and recommendation under 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B). The court has determined that, because of the limited damages sought in the revised application, no hearing on the application is required.

         Summonses were returned executed as to defendants United Mediation Services L.L.C. and Michael S. Thornton (ECF Nos. 14 and 13, respectively). Defendants failed to answer or otherwise plead, and default was entered pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(a) as to defendants United Mediation Services L.L.C. and Michael S. Thornton on January 3, 2018 (ECF No. 19).

         THE PARTIES

         Plaintiff, Tammy Castillo claims that Defendants, United Mediation Services L.L.C., et al., repeatedly violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq., in relation to a debt that had been previously forgiven. The allegations in her First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 12) are clear and specific. Defaulting defendants United Mediation Services L.L.C. and Michael S. Thornton are not minors or incompetent persons. As these defendants have not answered or otherwise pled, the allegations against defendants United Mediation Services L.L.C. and Michael S. Thornton are deemed admitted pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(b)(6).

         STANDARD

         The rule governing default judgment is Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(b), which reads as follows:

(b) Entering a Default Judgment.
(1) By the Clerk. If the plaintiff's claim is for a sum certain or a sum that can be made certain by computation, the clerk-on the plaintiff's request, with an affidavit showing the amount due-must enter judgment for that amount and costs against a defendant who has been defaulted for not appearing and who is neither a minor nor an incompetent person.
(2) By the Court. In all other cases, the party must apply to the court for a default judgment. A default judgment may be entered against a minor or incompetent person only if represented by a general guardian, conservator, or other like fiduciary who has appeared. If the party against whom a default judgment is sought has appeared personally or by a representative, that party or its representative must be served with written notice of the application at least 7 days before the hearing. The court may conduct hearings or make referrals- preserving any federal statutory right to a jury trial-when, to enter or effectuate judgment, it needs to:
(A) conduct an accounting;
(B) determine the amount of damages;
(C) establish the truth of any allegation by ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.