Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gallagher v. Pajevic

United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, Hammond Division

August 15, 2019

ROBERT GALLAGHER, Plaintiff,
v.
NADA PAJEVIC, Defendant.

          ROBERT GALLAGHER, PRO SE PLAINTIFF

          NADA PAJEVIC, PRO SE DEFENDANT

          OPINION AND ORDER

          JOSHUA P. KOLAR MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         This matter is before the Court on a Motion for Default Judgement on Sum Certain [DE 25], filed by Plaintiff Robert Gallagher, pro se, on August 31, 2017. Defendant Nada Pajevic is also litigating pro se.

         PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         Gallagher initiated this cause of action by filing a complaint on November 5, 2015. He filed an amended complaint on December 22, 2015. On April 25, 2016, the Court issued a notice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) that the action may be dismissed for failure to serve process. On May 10, 2016, Gallagher filed the summons returned executed showing that Pajevic was served on January 11, 2016. On June 23, 2016, Gallagher filed a motion for Clerk's Entry of Default. A Clerk's Entry of Default was entered on June 24, 2016.

         On July 12, 2016, Pajevic filed a document that she termed a “plead and response.” The Court struck this document because Pajevic was in default and therefore the default needed to be set aside before she could file an answer. On December 29, 2016, the Court issued a notice to Gallagher that the case may be dismissed for want of prosecution. Gallagher filed an “Answer to the Courts Notice” on January 18, 2017.

         On August 31, 2017, Gallagher filed the instant motion for default judgment, accompanied by an affidavit. On October 10, 2017, District Court Judge Rudy Lozano entered an order referring this matter to Magistrate Judge Paul R. Cherry, who held a hearing and issued a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C) on December 19, 2017. Judge Cherry retired, and the undersigned was subsequently referred to this case as magistrate judge.

         On June 21, 2019, the case was reassigned, upon the written consent of the parties, to the undersigned as the presiding judge to conduct all further proceedings and to order the entry of a final judgment. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

         STANDARD OF REVIEW

         Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), a judge may designate a magistrate judge to conduct hearings and submit proposed findings of fact and recommendations for disposition of dispositive motions. The court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, ” the magistrate judge's report. Id. at § 636(b)(1). Parties have fourteen days after being served with the magistrate judge's report to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations. Id. “A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” Id. Portions of the report to which there is no objection are reviewed for clear error. Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999) (citing Goffman v. Gross, 59 F.3d 668, 671 (7th Cir. 1995); Campbell v. United States Dist. Court, 501 F.2d 196, 206 (9th Cir. 1974)).

         JUDGE CHERRY'S REPORT AND GALLAGHER'S OBJECTIONS

         In his December 19, 2017 report, Judge Cherry recommended that the Clerk's Entry of Default be set aside sua sponte-that is, by the Court acting on its own without a party's motion- and that the motion for default judgment be denied.[1] Judge Cherry further recommended that a deadline be set for Pajevic to file an answer to the amended complaint and that she be advised of certain procedural matters.

         Gallagher filed objections with the Court. Gallagher did not date the objections, but the Court stamped the document as filed on January 8, 2018. Gallagher's certificate of service states that service of the objections was made on Pajevic on January 4, 2018. Because parties have fourteen days within which to file exceptions and because an extra three days are added when service is made by mail, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), objections to Judge Cherry's report were due on January 5, 2018. It appears that Gallagher attempted to timely file his objections, but they were ultimately filed on the first business day ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.