DAVID CHAPPELL; LISA CHAPPELL v. SRT EXPRESS, INC.; OMAR CUNNINGHAM

• Court: District Court, D. South Dakota
• Decided: February 26, 2026
• Docket: 5:24-cv-05068
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

_ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA WESTERN DIVISION

DAVID CHAPPELL; LISA CHAPPELL, 5:24-CV-05068-ECS Plaintiffs, ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND VS. RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR DEFAULT SRT EXPRESS, INC.; OMAR JUDGMENT CUNNINGHAM, Defendants.

Plaintiffs David and Lisa Chappell filed a motion for default judgment against Defendant Omar Cunningham. Doc. 28. This matter has been referred to United States Magistrate Judge Mark A. Moreno pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rule 72.1. Magistrate Judge Moreno submitted a report and recommended Plaintiffs’ motion for default judgment be granted. Doc. 42 at 11. The time for objecting to the report and recommendation has passed. Id. At this time, no objections have been filed. The Court has considered the report and recommendation for clear error! and adopts the report and recommendation, Doc. 42, in full. The report and recommendation is very well-reasoned and accurately sets forth the applicable law on the pending motion.

“When no timely objection is filed [on a dispositive motion], the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee notes to 1983 amendment; Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam) (The Eighth Circuit recognized that a district judge reviewing a report recommending grant of summary judgment “would only have to review the findings of the magistrate judge for clear error” if “no objections were filed and .. . the filing period had expired.”).

“When there are multiple defendants who may be jointly and severally liable for damages alleged by plaintiff, and some but less than all of those defendants default, the better practice is for the district court to stay its determination of damages against the defaulters until plaintiff's claim against the nondefaulters is resolved.” Pfanenstiel Architects, Inc. v. Chouteau Petroleum Co., 978 F.2d 430, 433 (8th Cir. 1992). Accordingly, this Court will stay its determination of damages against Defendant Cunningham until Plaintiffs’ claims against SRT Express, Inc. are resolved, most likely through a jury trial. At that point, this Court would determine the value and merit of any claims against Defendant Cunningham alleged in Plaintiffs’ Complaint. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, Doc. 42, is adopted in full. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment as to Defendant Cunningham, Doc. 28, is granted. It is further ORDERED that default judgment is entered against Defendant Cunningham. It is finally ORDERED that this Court stays its determination of damages against Defendant Cunningham until Plaintiffs’ claims for damages against SRT Express, Inc. are resolved. DATED this 2Gh day of February, 2026. BY THE COURT:

C C. SCHULTE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE