FRANKLIN v. THE JERSEY CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY
Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
EDWINA FRANKLIN, Civil Action No. 23-2002 (SDW) (CLW)
Plaintiff,
OPINION v.
THE JERSEY CITY HOUSING June 17, 2024 AUTHORITY, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Defendants.
WIGENTON, District Judge. THIS MATTER having come before this Court upon pro se Plaintiff Edwina Franklin’s (“Plaintiff”) Third Motion for Default Judgment (D.E. 37 (“Motion”)) against Defendant Jersey City Housing Authority (“JCHA”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 55(b)(2) and JCHA’s Motion to Vacate Default entered against it on April 1, 2024; and WHEREAS Plaintiff filed a Complaint against JCHA (D.E. 1) on April 5, 2023 and an Amended Complaint (D.E. 9) on May 3, 2023. On September 20, 2023, Magistrate Judge Waldor entered an order to consolidate this action with Franklin v. Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2:23-cv-20357-SDW-CLW. As a result, Plaintiff filed her Consolidated and Amended Complaint against JCHA and Defendant Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) in this action on October 17, 2023, alleging violations of the Fair Housing Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act by JCHA and HUD. (See generally D.E. 17.) Thereafter, Plaintiff filed proof of service upon JCHA on November 7, 2023, (D.E. 20). The Clerk of the Court entered default as to JCHA on April 1, 2024 for its failure to plead or otherwise respond. On May 15, 2024, counsel for JCHA notified this Court of its intent to oppose Plaintiff’s Motion. (D.E. 38); and WHEREAS Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(c) provides that a court may “set aside an
entry of default for good cause[.]” Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(c). In deciding whether to vacate a default, a court must consider: “(1) whether the plaintiff will be prejudiced; (2) whether the defendant has a meritorious defense; and (3) whether the default was the result of the defendant’s culpable conduct.” Gold Kist, Inc. v. Laurinburg Oil Co., 756 F.2d 14, 19 (3d Cir. 1985). This Court disfavors resolving disputes by default, and “the standard for setting aside a default is less stringent than for setting aside a default judgment.” Mettle v. First Union Nat’l Bank, 279 F. Supp. 2d 598, 601 (D.N.J. 2003) (citing Feliciano v. Reliant Tooling Co., Ltd., 691 F.2d 653, 656 (3d Cir.1982)); and WHEREAS this Court is satisfied that there is good cause to vacate the entry of default against JCHA and allow this dispute to be resolved on the merits. First, Plaintiff will not be
significantly prejudiced if the order is vacated. Default was entered as to JCHA on April 1, 2024, but Plaintiff has not obtained a default judgment. While JCHA failed to promptly respond to service of the Consolidated and Amended Complaint, JCHA’s delay would not impede Plaintiff’s ability to conduct discovery and litigate her claims. Second, JCHA has articulated a viable defense to Plaintiff’s claims—namely, that the JCHA’s denial of Plaintiff’s request to permit her to use the mortgage she received under the HOPE VI program to buy a second home was based on the terms of the mortgage and note, and not on any discriminatory animus. (D.E. 41-1 at 4–6.) Finally, although JCHA admits that it “overlooked” Plaintiff’s service of the Consolidated and Amended Complaint, its initial failure to properly respond to Plaintiff and defend its interests in this action were not intentional or due to any culpable conduct. (Id. at 6.) Examining the record as a whole, this Court concludes that the circumstances support granting JCHA’s Motion to Vacate Default; and WHEREAS because the Entry of Default against JCHA is vacated, Plaintiff’s Motion is
denied as moot; therefore JCHA’s Motion to Vacate Default is GRANTED. Plaintiffs’ Motion is DENIED. This Court grants JCHA thirty (30) days from the filing of this Order to file an answer, motion, or other responsive pleading. An appropriate order follows.
/s/ Susan D. Wigenton SUSAN D. WIGENTON, U.S.D.J.
Orig: Clerk cc: Parties Cathy L. Waldor, U.S.M.J.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
FRANKLIN v. THE JERSEY CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY (FRANKLIN v. THE JERSEY CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.