Hill v. Payne

E.D. Arkansas

Hill v. Payne

DecidedSeptember 12, 2024

Docket4:23-cv-01141

StatusUnknown

This text of Hill v. Payne (Hill v. Payne) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hill v. Payne, (E.D. Ark. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

ADAM HILL PLAINTIFF ADC #601559

v. No: 4:23-cv-01141-KGB-PSH

DEXTER PAYNE, et al. DEFENDANTS

ORDER

Before the Court is a motion filed by plaintiff Adam Hill seeking a court order compelling certain defendants to answer his complaint (Doc. No. 69). Hill also informs the Court that defendant Rory Griffin is deceased. Hill’s motion to compel defendants to file an answer is DENIED. Defendants may not be compelled to answer Hill’s complaint; however, default may be entered against them pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a).1 Accordingly, because Solomon Graves, Deborah Williams, and Stacey White have failed to file an answer or other

1 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 contemplates a two-step process for the entry of default judgments. First, pursuant to Rule 55(a), the party seeking a default judgment must have the Clerk enter the default by submitting the required proof that the opposing party has failed to plead or otherwise defend. Second, pursuant to Rule 55(b), the moving party may seek entry of judgment on the default under either subdivision (b)(1) or (b)(2) of the rule. See Dahl v. Kanawha Inv. Holding Co., 161 F.R.D. 673, 683 (N.D. Iowa 1995). The Court emphasizes that entry of default is separate from default judgment – one must occur before the other. See Johnson v. Dayton Elec. Mfg. Co., 140 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir. 1998); see also Hagen v. Sisseton-Wahpeton Community College, 205 F.3d 1040, 1042 (8th Cir. 2000) (citing Johnson for this requirement). The Court will not entertain a motion for default judgment until all dispositive motions are decided and this case is ready for trial. responsive pleading, despite, it appears, being validly served by mail, see Doc. Nos. 53, 54 & 62, the Court will order each of these defendants to show cause why they should not be held in default. The Court will enter separate orders to show cause as to each defendant and will also make a separate recommendation as to the dismissal of Hill’s claims against defendant Rory Griffin. IT IS SO ORDERED this 12th day of September, 2024.

UNITED STATES MAC — JUDGE

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

ADAM HILL PLAINTIFF ADC #601559

v. No: 4:23-cv-01141-KGB-PSH

DEXTER PAYNE, et al. DEFENDANTS

ORDER

Before the Court is a motion filed by plaintiff Adam Hill seeking a court order compelling certain defendants to answer his complaint (Doc. No. 69). Hill also informs the Court that defendant Rory Griffin is deceased. Hill’s motion to compel defendants to file an answer is DENIED. Defendants may not be compelled to answer Hill’s complaint; however, default may be entered against them pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a).1 Accordingly, because Solomon Graves, Deborah Williams, and Stacey White have failed to file an answer or other

1 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 contemplates a two-step process for the entry of default judgments. First, pursuant to Rule 55(a), the party seeking a default judgment must have the Clerk enter the default by submitting the required proof that the opposing party has failed to plead or otherwise defend. Second, pursuant to Rule 55(b), the moving party may seek entry of judgment on the default under either subdivision (b)(1) or (b)(2) of the rule. See Dahl v. Kanawha Inv. Holding Co., 161 F.R.D. 673, 683 (N.D. Iowa 1995). The Court emphasizes that entry of default is separate from default judgment – one must occur before the other. See Johnson v. Dayton Elec. Mfg. Co., 140 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir. 1998); see also Hagen v. Sisseton-Wahpeton Community College, 205 F.3d 1040, 1042 (8th Cir. 2000) (citing Johnson for this requirement). The Court will not entertain a motion for default judgment until all dispositive motions are decided and this case is ready for trial. responsive pleading, despite, it appears, being validly served by mail, see Doc. Nos. 53, 54 & 62, the Court will order each of these defendants to show cause why they should not be held in default. The Court will enter separate orders to show cause as to each defendant and will also make a separate recommendation as to the dismissal of Hill’s claims against defendant Rory Griffin. IT IS SO ORDERED this 12th day of September, 2024.

UNITED STATES MAC — JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Hill v. Payne, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hill-v-payne-ared-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack