Sentementes v. Lamont

District Court, D. Connecticut·Decided July 27, 2021·No. 3:21-cv-00453·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

: THOMAS SENTEMENTES, : Plaintiff, : CASE NO. 3:21-cv-453 (MPS) : v. : : NED LAMONT, : Defendant. : JULY 27, 2021 :

_____________________________________________________________________________

ORDER Plaintiff Thomas Sentementes, has filed two motions seeking entry of default against defendant Pasqualina Bastone for failure to plead. The first motion [ECF No. 32] is GRANTED and the second [ECF No. 33] is DENIED as moot. The Clerk is directed to enter the default of defendant Bastone. The plaintiff shall serve a copy of this order on Pasqualina Bastone, return receipt requested, and he shall file proof of such service to the docket. The plaintiff has also filed a motion for entry of default judgment against defendant Bastone. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 sets forth a two-step process for obtaining a default judgment. First, the plaintiff must obtain a default under Rule 55(a). Once default has entered, the plaintiff may seek a default judgment under Rule 55(b). Priestly v. Headminder, Inc., 647 F.3d 497, 505 (2d Cir. 2011). The plaintiff filed his motion for entry of default judgment over a week before he filed the motions for entry of default considered above. Thus, his motion for entry of default judgment [ECF No. 30] is DENIED as prematurely filed. See American Alliance Ins. Co., Ltd. v. Eagle Ins. Co., 92 F.3d 57, 59 (2d Cir. 1996) (entry of default judgment procedurally flawed by lack of first obtaining entry of default); Transatlantic Auto Grp., Inc. v. Unitrans-Pra Co., 2011 WL 4543877, at *18 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 9. 2011) (denying motion for default judgment for failure to comply with two-part process), report and recommendation

adopted by 2011 WL 4543838 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 29, 2011). Finally, the plaintiff has filed a motion seeking an order that defendant John Wanat’s attorney send him copies of all filings by regular mail. As the Court already has granted the plaintiff’s motion to compel and reminded counsel of his obligation to send copies to the plaintiff by regular mail, his motion [ECF No. 31] is DENIED as moot. SO ORDERED this 27th day of July 2021 at Hartford, Connecticut. /s/ Michael P. Shea United States District Judge

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

Sentementes v. Lamont, (D. Conn. 2021).

Sentementes v. Lamont (Sentementes v. Lamont) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Priestley v. Headminder, Inc.
647 F.3d 497 (Second Circuit, 2011)