Turner v. Awake Store LLC
- Vyskocil
- 1:24-cv-07992
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Turner v. Awake Store LLC, Judge Vyskocil denied Turner’s default-judgment motion without prejudice and required the company to obtain counsel.
Tavon Turner’s request for a default judgment was denied without prejudice. Awake Store LLC was required to obtain a lawyer and respond to the complaint by the deadlines set by the court.
What happened
In Turner v. Awake Store LLC, Tavon Turner asked the court to enter a judgment because Awake Store LLC had not responded to his complaint. The clerk had recorded the company’s failure to respond, and Turner then sought a default judgment.
The court denied the motion without prejudice, meaning Turner may renew it later. The court explained that a person identified as the company’s apparent owner had filed letters showing an intention to defend, and that disputes are generally preferred to be resolved on their merits. The court also clarified that the earlier filings did not mean a default judgment had already been entered.
Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil ordered Awake Store LLC to have a lawyer enter an appearance by June 9, 2025, and required that lawyer to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint by July 7, 2025. The court also directed Turner’s lawyer to serve the order on the company by May 16, 2025.
The detailed version
- Turner v. Awake Store LLC · No. 1:24-cv-07992
- Vyskocil
- May 12, 2025
Background
Tavon Turner filed this action on October 21, 2024. The docket later included an affirmation stating that Awake Store LLC had been served. After the company did not appear or respond to the complaint, the Clerk of Court entered a certificate of default. Turner then moved for entry of a default judgment—a judgment based on a defendant’s failure to defend.
The court scheduled a hearing on Turner’s motion. Micheanggello Rojo, described in the opinion as the purported or apparent owner of Awake Store LLC, filed letter motions seeking to adjourn the hearing and to vacate what he called a default judgment and file a late response. The opinion includes a footnote clarifying that no default judgment had been entered in the case. Turner also asked to adjourn the hearing because of Rojo’s filings and recent settlement discussions. The court adjourned the hearing indefinitely.
Reasoning
The court explained that Rule 55 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure uses a two-step process: first, entry of a default; second, entry of a default judgment. A plaintiff is not automatically entitled to a default judgment merely because a defendant did not appear or respond. The decision whether to enter one is left to the trial court, and the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit prefers resolving disputes on their merits.
The court found that Rojo’s recent filings clearly attempted to appear and stated an intention to defend the action. Because those filings could allow the court to resolve the dispute on its merits, the court denied Turner’s motion for entry of a default judgment without prejudice to renewal.
Representation and Orders
The court separately stated that Rojo’s letters incorrectly described him as the individual defendant appearing without a lawyer. Awake Store LLC, not an individual person, was the named defendant. The court explained that an individual may represent himself or herself without a lawyer, but a non-lawyer may not represent a separate person or entity. Accordingly, Awake Store LLC must be represented by a lawyer and may not appear through Rojo without counsel.
The court ordered Awake Store LLC to have counsel enter an appearance on the docket by June 9,
- The company’s forthcoming counsel must file an answer or otherwise respond to the complaint by July 7,
- Turner’s counsel must serve the order on Awake Store LLC by May 16,
- The court warned that failure to comply with its orders, deadlines, or applicable rules could lead to sanctions, including monetary penalties, dismissal or preclusion of claims or defenses, or a later default judgment. The Clerk was directed to terminate Turner’s pending motion at docket entry 17.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.