From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Young v. Leblanc

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
Dec 28, 2018
CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-6624 SECTION: "R"(1) (E.D. La. Dec. 28, 2018)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-6624 SECTION: "R"(1)

12-28-2018

MICHAEL YOUNG v. JAMES LEBLANC, ET AL.


ORDER

Plaintiff has filed a "Motion for Default Judgment." Rec. Doc. 19. For the following reasons, that motion is DENIED.

First, the motion for default judgment is premature because a default has not been entered pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). See Structural Concrete Products, LLC v. Clarendon America Insurance Co., 244 F.R.D. 317, 328 (E.D. Va. 2007); Griffin v. Foti, Civ. Action No. 03-1274, 2003 WL 22836493, at *1 (E.D. La. Nov. 24, 2003); Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Heath, Civ. Action No. 95-509, 1995 WL 258317, at *1 (E.D. La. Apr. 27, 1995).

Second, in any event, entry of a default judgment is not warranted. Entry of a default judgment is a matter of discretion, and "a party is not entitled to a default judgment as a matter of right, even where the defendant is technically in default. In fact, default judgments are a drastic remedy, not favored by the Federal Rules and resorted to by courts only in extreme situations." Lewis v. Lynn, 236 F.3d 766, 767 (5th Cir. 2001) (citations, quotation marks, and brackets omitted); accord Griffin, 2003 WL 22836493, at *1. This is not such a situation, especially in light of the fact that the defendants have now answered plaintiff's complaint.

Plaintiff has also filed a "Motion to Strike." Rec. Doc. 23. That motion is likewise DENIED. In his motion, plaintiff challenges the validity of some of the defenses the defendants have asserted in their pro forma answer. While several of plaintiff's points are well taken considering that he has requested only prospective injunctive relief, the validity of the defenses the defendants actually pursue will be decided at a later stage in this proceeding.

Plaintiff has also filed a "Motion to Compel Discovery." Rec. Doc. 28. The defendants are ORDERED to file a response to motion no later than January 23, 2019, at which time the motion will be taken under submission without the necessity of oral argument.

New Orleans, Louisiana, this twenty-eighth day of December, 2018.

/s/ _________

JANIS VAN MEERVELD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Young v. Leblanc

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
Dec 28, 2018
CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-6624 SECTION: "R"(1) (E.D. La. Dec. 28, 2018)
Case details for

Young v. Leblanc

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL YOUNG v. JAMES LEBLANC, ET AL.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

Date published: Dec 28, 2018

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-6624 SECTION: "R"(1) (E.D. La. Dec. 28, 2018)