Povill v. Mid American Property
This text of 2012 DNH 153 (Povill v. Mid American Property) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Povill v . Mid American Property 11-CV-287-SM 8/31/12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Joshua Povill and Gary Povill, Plaintiffs
v. Case N o . 11-cv-287-SM Opinion N o . 2012 DNH 153 Mid American Property Management, Inc., Defendant
O R D E R
Defendant, Mid American Property Management, Inc. (“Mid
American”) seeks to set aside a default entered against it after
it failed to timely appear. Because I find good cause exists to
set aside the default, that motion (document n o . 30) is granted.
This case arises from significant water damage to
plaintiffs’ real property that allegedly resulted when a mortgage
lender (Bank of America) wrongfully took possession of the
property, changed the locks (precluding plaintiffs’ access), and
then failed to reasonably heat the building in winter, which
caused water pipes to burst and flood the premises. Mid American
says it acted at all times as Bank of America’s agent. When
served with process in this case, Mid American forwarded the suit
papers to Bank of America, which was also named as a defendant,
reasonably believing that Bank of America would handle the matter
on its behalf. Bank of America subsequently filed an appearance on behalf
of itself and Mid American in the original action filed in state
court, and later removed the case to federal court, but
apparently only on behalf of itself. Subsequently Bank of
America settled the claims against i t .
Without belaboring the matter, the default is set aside
because Mid American (through its president and sole shareholder,
Brandon Johnson) reasonably thought Bank of America was handling
the litigation on its behalf; subsequent correspondence from Bank
of America’s counsel advising Mid American to file a separate
appearance was not brought to Johnson’s attention by Mid American
clerical staff, through error (clerical staff merely “filed” the
correspondence based on the same misapprehension that Bank of
America was handling the matter); Johnson did not willfully
ignore the matter or intentionally fail to respond in a timely
manner, and the default by Mid American was not willful; Mid
American (through Johnson) promptly appeared at the hearing on
plaintiffs’ default judgment motion, after a different employee
brought the pending damages hearing to his attention and he
realized that a mistake had been made; Mid American complied with
the court’s directive to obtain legal counsel and file
appropriate pleadings within thirty (30) days; Mid American’s
motion to set aside default sets forth plausible and potentially
2 meritorious defenses related to causation; the amount involved is
not immodest to either party; setting aside the default will not
substantially prejudice plaintiffs since the merits of the case
relates almost exclusively to Mid American’s own conduct (and
plaintiffs’) and there is little chance of loss of relevant
evidence or discovery difficulties; setting aside the default is
also consistent with the recognized policy preference for
resolving civil disputes on the merits; Mid American, through
Johnson, acted in subjective good faith albeit carelessly and
naively; and plausible and potentially meritorious cross-claims
are likely. All of which is to say that good cause exists to set
aside the default. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(c); Indigo America, Inc.
v . Big Impressions, LLC, 597 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2010).
Conclusion
The motion to set aside default (document n o . 30) is
granted, but conditioned on Mid American’s payment of plaintiffs’
reasonable attorney’s fees associated with pursuing the default.
The court would not expect fees exceeding $1,500.00 to be
reasonable. If the parties cannot agree on a reasonable figure,
plaintiffs’ counsel shall file a well-supported motion for
reimbursement which will be considered in due course.
3 SO ORDERED.
St/even J./McAuliffe fnited States District Judge
August 3 1 , 2012
cc: W . E . Whittington, Esq. Jennifer T . Beaudet, Esq. Thomas J. Pappas, Esq. Michael J. Ramsdell, Esq.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2012 DNH 153, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/povill-v-mid-american-property-nhd-2012.