Falls Lake National Insurance Company v. Indicar of Daytona Inc.

M.D. Florida

Falls Lake National Insurance Company v. Indicar of Daytona Inc.

DecidedMay 24, 2024

Docket6:24-cv-00385

StatusUnknown

This text of Falls Lake National Insurance Company v. Indicar of Daytona Inc. (Falls Lake National Insurance Company v. Indicar of Daytona Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, M.D. Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Falls Lake National Insurance Company v. Indicar of Daytona Inc., (M.D. Fla. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

FALLS LAKE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No: 6:24-cv-385-JSS-LHP

INDICAR OF DAYTONA INC., DAYTONA KIA, DAYTONA MITSUBISHI, INDICOM INC., THEODORE FOSTER and JOYCE NIEVES, AS PR FOR THE ESTATE OF KATWAINA BROWN,

Defendants

ORDER This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s motions for Clerk’s defaults against Defendants Theodore Foster, Daytona Mitsubishi, Daytona Kia, Indicar of Daytona, Inc., and Indicom, Inc. Doc. Nos. 35–39. Upon review, the motions are due to be denied without prejudice. As an initial matter, none of the motions comply with Local Rule 3.01(g), despite the appearance of at least one Defendant in this case. See Doc. No. 25; Local Rule 3.01(g). The motions also fail to comply with Local Rule 3.01(a) because they do not include memoranda of legal authority in support. See Doc. Nos. 35–39. Relatedly, the motions fail to adequately address, with citation to legal authority,

that service of process on Defendants was proper. See generally United States v. Donald, No. 3:09-cv-147-J-32HTS, 2009 WL 1810357, at *1 (M.D. Fla. June 24, 2009) (before a Clerk’s default can be entered against a defendant, the Court must

determine that the defendant was properly served). Specifically, Plaintiff fails to address how service on Defendants Daytona Mitsubishi, Daytona Kia, Indicar of Daytona, Inc. and Indicom, Inc. by serving “Tom Pelchen” as “General Manager – Authorized” was sufficient to effect proper service under governing law. See Doc.

Nos. 17–20; see also Doc. Nos. 36–39. And Plaintiff’s request for Clerk’s default against Theodore Foster is based on a document titled, “Non-Enforceable Return of Service,” with no explanation from Plaintiff. See Doc. Nos. 26, 35.

Accordingly, each of the motions (Doc. Nos. 35–39) is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff shall renew its requests for Clerk’s default within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order, which request(s) must fully comply with the Local

Rules, address the issues outlined in this Order, and include a memorandum of legal authority establishing that service of process on the Defendant(s) was proper under applicable law. DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on May 24, 2024.

ay □□□□□ LESLIE AN PRICE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Unrepresented Parties

Qo

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

FALLS LAKE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No: 6:24-cv-385-JSS-LHP

INDICAR OF DAYTONA INC., DAYTONA KIA, DAYTONA MITSUBISHI, INDICOM INC., THEODORE FOSTER and JOYCE NIEVES, AS PR FOR THE ESTATE OF KATWAINA BROWN,

Defendants

ORDER This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s motions for Clerk’s defaults against Defendants Theodore Foster, Daytona Mitsubishi, Daytona Kia, Indicar of Daytona, Inc., and Indicom, Inc. Doc. Nos. 35–39. Upon review, the motions are due to be denied without prejudice. As an initial matter, none of the motions comply with Local Rule 3.01(g), despite the appearance of at least one Defendant in this case. See Doc. No. 25; Local Rule 3.01(g). The motions also fail to comply with Local Rule 3.01(a) because they do not include memoranda of legal authority in support. See Doc. Nos. 35–39. Relatedly, the motions fail to adequately address, with citation to legal authority,

that service of process on Defendants was proper. See generally United States v. Donald, No. 3:09-cv-147-J-32HTS, 2009 WL 1810357, at *1 (M.D. Fla. June 24, 2009) (before a Clerk’s default can be entered against a defendant, the Court must

determine that the defendant was properly served). Specifically, Plaintiff fails to address how service on Defendants Daytona Mitsubishi, Daytona Kia, Indicar of Daytona, Inc. and Indicom, Inc. by serving “Tom Pelchen” as “General Manager – Authorized” was sufficient to effect proper service under governing law. See Doc.

Nos. 17–20; see also Doc. Nos. 36–39. And Plaintiff’s request for Clerk’s default against Theodore Foster is based on a document titled, “Non-Enforceable Return of Service,” with no explanation from Plaintiff. See Doc. Nos. 26, 35.

Accordingly, each of the motions (Doc. Nos. 35–39) is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff shall renew its requests for Clerk’s default within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order, which request(s) must fully comply with the Local

Rules, address the issues outlined in this Order, and include a memorandum of legal authority establishing that service of process on the Defendant(s) was proper under applicable law. DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on May 24, 2024.

ay □□□□□ LESLIE AN PRICE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Unrepresented Parties

Qo

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Falls Lake National Insurance Company v. Indicar of Daytona Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/falls-lake-national-insurance-company-v-indicar-of-daytona-inc-flmd-2024.