IRONSHORE SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY v. LOGAN

M.D. Georgia

IRONSHORE SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY v. LOGAN

DecidedJanuary 24, 2024

Docket5:23-cv-00358

StatusUnknown

This text of IRONSHORE SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY v. LOGAN (IRONSHORE SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY v. LOGAN) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, M.D. Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

IRONSHORE SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY v. LOGAN, (M.D. Ga. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION

IRONSHORE SPECIALTY ) INSURANCE COMPANY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:23-cv-358 (MTT) ) ALPHONZO LOGAN, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) __________________ )

ORDER Plaintiff Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company (“Ironshore”) filed this declaratory judgment action against defendants Alphonzo Logan, Dewayne Logan, Jamaar Dewayne Logan as Executor of the Estate of Mary Francis Logan, and 4 West Holdings, Inc. (“4 West”). Doc. 1. Defendants Alphonzo Logan, Dewayne Logan, and Jamaar Dewayne Logan timely filed an answer and are defending the case. Docs. 14; 15; 16; 18. Defendant 4 West, however, did not file a response to the complaint and is in default. Docs. 17; 23. Ironshore now moves for default judgment against 4 West. Doc. 25. Generally speaking, a Court may enter a default judgment against a party for failure to plead or otherwise defend a case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 55. However, “in cases involving multiple defendants, some of whom are not in default, courts should withhold granting a default judgment until the trial of the action on the merits against the remaining defendants.” Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Bailey, 378 F. Supp. 3d 1213, 1221 (M.D. Ga. 2019); see also Frow v. De La Vega, 82 U.S. 552, 554 (1872) (stating that “a final decree on the merits against the defaulting defendant alone, pending the continuance of the cause [against the other defendants], would be incongruous and illegal”); Gulf Coast Fans v. Midwest Electronics Importers, Inc., 740 F.2d 1499, 1512 (11th Cir. 1984) (stating that it is “sound policy” that “judgment should not be entered

against a defaulting defendant if the other [similarly situated or jointly liable] defendant prevails on the merits”). Accordingly, Ironshore’s motion for default judgment (Doc. 25) is DENIED without prejudice. SO ORDERED, this 24th day of January, 2024. S/ Marc T. Treadwell MARC T. TREADWELL, CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION

IRONSHORE SPECIALTY ) INSURANCE COMPANY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:23-cv-358 (MTT) ) ALPHONZO LOGAN, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) __________________ )

ORDER Plaintiff Ironshore Specialty Insurance Company (“Ironshore”) filed this declaratory judgment action against defendants Alphonzo Logan, Dewayne Logan, Jamaar Dewayne Logan as Executor of the Estate of Mary Francis Logan, and 4 West Holdings, Inc. (“4 West”). Doc. 1. Defendants Alphonzo Logan, Dewayne Logan, and Jamaar Dewayne Logan timely filed an answer and are defending the case. Docs. 14; 15; 16; 18. Defendant 4 West, however, did not file a response to the complaint and is in default. Docs. 17; 23. Ironshore now moves for default judgment against 4 West. Doc. 25. Generally speaking, a Court may enter a default judgment against a party for failure to plead or otherwise defend a case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 55. However, “in cases involving multiple defendants, some of whom are not in default, courts should withhold granting a default judgment until the trial of the action on the merits against the remaining defendants.” Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Bailey, 378 F. Supp. 3d 1213, 1221 (M.D. Ga. 2019); see also Frow v. De La Vega, 82 U.S. 552, 554 (1872) (stating that “a final decree on the merits against the defaulting defendant alone, pending the continuance of the cause [against the other defendants], would be incongruous and illegal”); Gulf Coast Fans v. Midwest Electronics Importers, Inc., 740 F.2d 1499, 1512 (11th Cir. 1984) (stating that it is “sound policy” that “judgment should not be entered

against a defaulting defendant if the other [similarly situated or jointly liable] defendant prevails on the merits”). Accordingly, Ironshore’s motion for default judgment (Doc. 25) is DENIED without prejudice. SO ORDERED, this 24th day of January, 2024. S/ Marc T. Treadwell MARC T. TREADWELL, CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

IRONSHORE SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY v. LOGAN, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ironshore-specialty-insurance-company-v-logan-gamd-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack