Owenby v. Gardner

264 F. Supp. 424, 10 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 1329, 1967 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7280
CourtDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia
DecidedJanuary 19, 1967
DocketCiv. A. No. 10376
StatusPublished

This text of 264 F. Supp. 424 (Owenby v. Gardner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Owenby v. Gardner, 264 F. Supp. 424, 10 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 1329, 1967 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7280 (N.D. Ga. 1967).

Opinion

ORDER OF COURT.

HOOPER, District Judge.

Plaintiff in the above styled case filed her complaint in this Court on August 23, 1966 seeking a review of a final decision of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare denying social security benefits. Service was perfected upon the local United States Attorney on August 25, 1966, and upon the Secretary on September 1, 1966. Upon motion by plaintiff, on the 2nd day of December, 1966 the Clerk of Court entered a default due to the failure on the part of the Secretary to answer the complaint. Three days later an answer was filed. On January 4, 1967 the defendant moved for summary judgment in his favor. Plaintiff then made a motion to strike defendant’s answer and motion for summary judgment. She further prayed for direction as to how she should present her evidence to show her right to relief pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure No. [425]*42555(e) and for entry of Judgment in her favor.

Rule 55(e) provides:

“No judgment by default shall be entered against the United States or an officer or agency thereof unless the claimant establishes his claim or right to relief by evidence satisfactory to the court.”

In the ease of Fedor v. Ribicoff (D.C.Pa.1962) 211 F.Supp. 520 the Court held that before the plaintiff could be entitled to judgment in his favor he must have established proof of his claim. In this type of action that burden is to show substantial evidence in the administrative record.

The motion to strike the answer and motion for summary judgment is denied. The entry of default of December 2, 1966 is set aside. The plaintiff is given twenty (20) days from this date to submit a brief responding to the motion for summary judgment by the defendant, if he so desires.

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

Related

Fedor v. Ribicoff
211 F. Supp. 520 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1962)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
264 F. Supp. 424, 10 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 1329, 1967 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7280, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/owenby-v-gardner-gand-1967.