United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT
F. Cox United States District Court Judge.
sued Defendants for breach of contract, fraud, conversion,
and unjust enrichment. After being properly served,
Defendants failed to answer Plaintiff's complaint. The
Clerk entered defaults against Defendants. Plaintiff now
moves for a default judgment in the amount of $202, 170.65,
and requests $2, 244 in attorney fees and $439 in costs. For
the reasons below, the Court will grant Plaintiff's
Bejamin McAfee (“McAfee”) is the “president
and owner” of Defendant McAfee's Communications,
Inc. (“MCI”). Compl. ¶ 3. In March 2018, MCI
contracted with Plaintiff General Dynamics Land Systems,
Inc., (“GDLS”) to provide “technical
specifications, equipment and on-site installation of an
emergency alert system.” Id. at ¶ 8, 10.
Under the contract, MCI promised to deliver on all of its
obligations no later than June 1, 2018. Id. at
January 25, 2019, GDLS issued a notice of default and demand
for performance. Id. at ¶ 16. In response,
McAfee emailed GDLS, stating that MCI had “officially
closed” and that it could not perform under the
contract. Id. at ¶ 17. Neither McAfee nor MCI
returned unaccounted-for funds that GDLS had already paid,
and they ignored subsequent demands. Id. at 17,
April 8, 2019, GDLS filed its complaint, which includes four
counts: (1) breach of contract; (2) fraud; (3) common law and
statutory conversion; and (4) unjust enrichment. GDLS's
statutory conversion count includes a claim for treble
damages under M.C.L. 600.2919a. (ECF No. 1, PageID 9).
Defendants were properly served on April 28, 2019. (ECF Nos.
23, 2019, GDLS sought, and received, a clerk's entry of
default against both Defendants. (ECF Nos. 8, 9). Thereafter,
GDLS filed this motion for default judgment, requesting a
judgment in the amount of $202, 170.65. GDLS also requests
$2, 244 in attorney fees and $439 in costs. (ECF No. 11).
GDLS served Defendants with notice of the Court's
intention to hear oral arguments on this motion. (ECF No.
14). The Court heard oral arguments on this motion on October
3, 2019. Neither Defendant appeared at the hearing.
55(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that a
default can be entered against a party for failure to plead
or otherwise defend the claim. Because the Clerk of the Court
entered a default against Defendants, “the well pleaded
factual allegations in the Complaint, except those relating
to damages, are taken as true.” Ford Motor Co. v.
Cross, 441 F.Supp.2d 837, 848 (E.D. Mich. 2006) (citing
Antoine v. Atlas Turner, Inc., 66 F.3d 105, 110-11
(6th Cir. 1995)). In other words, the entry of a default
against Defendants “conclusively establishes every
factual predicate of a claim for relief.” See
Thomas v. Miller, 489 F.3d 293, 299 (6th Cir. 2007);
see also Brockton Sav. Bank v. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell
& Co., 771 F.2d 5, 13 (1st Cir. 1985)
(“[T]here is no question that, default having been
entered, each of [the plaintiff's] allegations of fact
must be taken as true and each of its  claims must be
considered established as a matter of law.”).
regarding the amount of damages must be proven."
Broadcast Music, Inc. v. Pub Acquisition, LLC, 2014
WL 2993661 at *4 (N.D. Ohio 2014). Under Rule 55(b)(1), GDLS
must "establish that the damages requested are such that
may be computed to a sum certain." Meyer v. City of
Cincinnati, 943 F.2d 52 at *3 (6th Cir. 1991). "The
court must conduct an inquiry sufficient to establish damages
to a reasonable certainty." J&J Sports Prods.,
Inc. v. Cole's Place, Inc., 2012 WL 469918, at *2
(W.D. Ky. 2012).
GDLS's allegations, which are accepted as true, show that
MCI breached the loan contract by failing to perform. Compl.
at ¶ 8-23. And GDLS's allegations establish that
McAfee is also liable because he is MCI's alter ego.
Compl. ¶ 7. Thus, the Defendants are liable to GDLS.
support its damage award request, GDLS submitted a
declaration from one of its supply-chain managers, Kraig
Wilson. (ECF No. 11-3). Wilson testifed that GDLS has
incurred the following damages:
a. $63, 566.94 in amounts paid to MCI for particular
materials and/or services never performed, which amount was
not returned to GDLS despite demand for same;
b. $11, 469.83 in excess costs, beyond those that would have
otherwise been due to MCI had it fully performed its
contractual requirements, to resource certain aspects of