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.

Doe v. Atwater

United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division

August 15, 2019

JANE DOE, Plaintiff,
v.
JOSHUA ATWATER, et al. Defendants

          Joseph P. DiCola of Counsel

          Kim Magistrate Judge.

          MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT JOSHUA ATWATER NOW COMES

          Jorge L. Alonso Judge

         Plaintiff, JANE DOE, by and through one of her attorneys, Joseph P. DiCola, Of Counsel to the Shiller Preyar Law Offices, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b) and moves of default against Defendant Joshua Atwater, and in support thereof states as follows.

         1. On May 11, 2017, Plaintiff Jane Doe filed this lawsuit alleging that Defendant Joshua Atwater, an employee of the Secretary of State of Illinois, sexually assaulted her while administering a mandatory driving test. Dkt. 1.

         2. On May 23, 2017, Defendant Atwater was served personally at his home in Chicago. Dkt. 6.To date, Defendant Atwater has not filed an appearance or answer in this case.

         3. On November 12, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for entry of default against Defendant Joshua Atwater pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a). Dkt. 26.

         4. On November 21, 2017, this Court granted Plaintiff's motion to the extent it sought a default order and Defendant Atwater was found in default. Dkt. 29.

         5. Plaintiff sent Defendant Atwater a copy of her motion for default via certified mail on November 14, 2017. See Exhibit A. Defendant Atwater was served with the motion on December 14, 2017. See Exhibit B.

         6. Defendant Atwater has still not appeared, answered, filed a response to Plaintiff's motion, or contacted the undersigned. Accordingly, Plaintiff now respectfully moves this Court for default judgment against Defendant Atwater pursuant to Rule 55(b).

         7. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b) provides in relevant part:

(1) By the Clerk. If the plaintiff's claim is for a sum certain or a sum that can be made certain by computation, the clerk--on the plaintiff's request, with an affidavit showing the amount due--must enter judgment for that amount and costs against a defendant who has been defaulted for not appearing and who is neither a minor nor an incompetent person.
(2) By the Court. In all other cases, the party must apply to the court for a default judgment.

         8. Default judgment establishes, "as a matter of law, that defendants are liable to plaintiff on each cause of action." e360 Insight v. Spamhaus Project, 500 F.3d 594, 602 (7th Cir. 2007). The well-pleaded facts of the complaint relating to liability are taken as true upon default. Dundee Cement Co. v. Howard Pipe & Concrete Prods., Inc., 722 F.2d 1319, 1323 (7th Cir. 1983). Dundee further instructs that "where liability is joint and several, the entry of default judgment against fewer than all defendants in an action is proper," ...


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.