Local Union 407 Insurance Fund v. Shippers Freight Lines, Inc.

774 F.2d 1163, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 14040, 1985 WL 13760
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 26, 1985
Docket85-3369
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 774 F.2d 1163 (Local Union 407 Insurance Fund v. Shippers Freight Lines, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Local Union 407 Insurance Fund v. Shippers Freight Lines, Inc., 774 F.2d 1163, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 14040, 1985 WL 13760 (6th Cir. 1985).

Opinion

774 F.2d 1163

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
Local Union 407 Insurance Fund, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Shippers Freight Lines, Inc., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 85-3369

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

9/26/85

N.D.Ohio

DISMISSED

ORDER

BEFORE: KEITH, KENNEDY and MILBURN, Circuit Judges.

This matter is before the Court upon plaintiff-appellee's motion to dismiss. The defendant-appellant did not file a response in opposition.

Local Union 407 Insurance Fund ('the union') sued Shippers Freight Lines, Inc. ('the employer') alleging that the employer was delinquent in making required payments to the union pension fund. When answer time expired without the employer pleading or otherwise defending, the union filed a motion for default judgment which the district clerk noted on the docket sheet. After a hearing, the district court directed the parties to prepare a consent entry of judgment, but none was filed in the ten months that followed, even though the union drafted several proposals for the employer to sign.

Instead, the employer sought relief from judgment, Rule 60(b)(1), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which the district court denied, on April 3, 1985. The employer timely appealed but that alone does not confer jurisdiction on this Court. Although this was not the reason for denial, the district court said in its order: 'Review of the court record shows that final judgment was never entered.' The original entry of default by the clerk was simply official recognition that the employer was in default of its answer. Rule 55(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. It was no more than an interlocutory act looking toward the subsequent step, an entry of a final judgment by default. Rule 55(b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; Chrysler Credit Corp. v. Macino, 710 F.2d 363 (7th Cir. 1983). That step was never taken. Since no final judgment exists from which the employer could appeal,

It is ORDERED that the motion to dismiss is granted.

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

Related

Ivy v. Thornton (In Re Thornton)
419 B.R. 787 (W.D. Tennessee, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
774 F.2d 1163, 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 14040, 1985 WL 13760, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/local-union-407-insurance-fund-v-shippers-freight--ca6-1985.