Karim v. Randalee Mae Acosta and Yovanni N. Bisono a/k/a Yovanny N. Bisono

Background

Karim brings personal-injury claims arising from a car accident. The amended complaint alleges that Randalee Mae Acosta was driving a 2018 Audi Q7 that struck Karim’s vehicle and that Yovanni N. Bisono, also identified as Yovanny N. Bisono, owned the Audi.

The original complaint named Acosta and Niurca Acosta. Acosta initially appeared and filed an answer, stating that she was driving the vehicle and that she did not have insurance. After a court conference, Acosta explained that she had identified herself at the accident scene as “Niurca Acosta,” and that Niurca Acosta was her aunt and had no connection to the action. Karim then filed an amended complaint naming Acosta and Bisono.

Acosta did not respond to the amended complaint. She also did not comply with an order requiring her to provide a no-insurance affidavit. After she failed to appear at an October 27, 2025 telephone conference, the court ordered her to explain in writing why a default should not be entered. She did not submit that explanation and did not appear at a November 10, 2025 telephone conference, despite being warned that default would be entered if she failed to appear. Karim reported that Bisono could not be served and was ordered to complete valid service by December 31, 2025.

Legal standard

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) requires the clerk to enter a party’s default when that party has failed to plead or otherwise defend and the failure is shown through an affidavit or other evidence. The court explained that default is an extreme sanction and should generally be used as a last resort rather than solely because a party responded late to an amended pleading.

Court’s reasoning

The court found that Acosta’s failure went beyond her failure to respond to the amended complaint. She failed to comply with the no-insurance-affidavit order, failed to respond to the order requiring her to show cause why default should not be entered, and failed to attend the November 10 conference after receiving a warning. Taken together, these actions showed that she had failed to otherwise defend the action.

Disposition

The court directed the Clerk of Court to enter a default against Acosta under Rule 55(a). This was an entry of default, not a default judgment determining the amount or other relief owed. The court directed Karim not to seek a default judgment against Acosta until the action against Bisono concluded by trial, motion, or another resolution. The opinion does not decide the underlying personal-injury claims.