Miller v. Harshbarger
- Wilhelmina Wright
- 0:21-cv-00124
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 5
In Miller v. Harshbarger, Judge Wright granted default judgment and ordered $170,334.50 for unpaid hogs and delivery costs.
Eli J. Miller received a default judgment, and Ed Harshbarger was ordered to owe Miller $170,334.50 for the hogs and delivery costs.
What happened
In Miller v. Harshbarger, Eli J. Miller alleged that Ed Harshbarger agreed to buy 2,065 hogs for $50 each and to pay the delivery costs. The hogs were delivered, but Harshbarger did not pay the $103,250 purchase price or $67,084.50 in delivery costs.
Harshbarger did not respond after being served by publication, and the clerk entered his default. The court found that Miller’s allegations established a valid breach-of-contract claim under both Minnesota and Idaho law. It did not decide whether Miller adequately pleaded his separate conversion and unjust-enrichment claims because the requested damages were the same.
Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright granted Miller’s motion for default judgment and ordered the clerk to enter judgment against Harshbarger for $170,334.50, representing the hog price and delivery costs.
The detailed version
- Miller v. Harshbarger · No. 0:21-cv-00124
- Wilhelmina Wright
- Dec. 16, 2021
Background
Eli J. Miller sued Ed Harshbarger on three theories: breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and conversion. Miller alleged that Harshbarger agreed to purchase 2,065 hogs at $50 per hog and to pay the costs of delivering them. Miller alleged that the hogs were delivered and that Harshbarger did not reject, return, or attempt to return them, but failed to pay $103,250 for the hogs and $67,084.50 for delivery.
After Miller was unable to serve Harshbarger personally, the court authorized alternative service. Miller served Harshbarger by publication in May and June 2021 and filed proof of publication. The clerk entered Harshbarger’s default on July 12, 2021, after Harshbarger failed to answer or otherwise respond. Miller then moved for default judgment.
Analysis
A default judgment requires both an entry of default by the clerk and a court order granting judgment. When default is entered, the complaint’s factual allegations generally are treated as admitted, but the court must still determine whether those facts establish a valid legal claim and must determine the amount of damages.
Miller did not address whether Minnesota or Idaho law governed the contract. The court concluded that the alleged facts established a valid breach-of-contract claim under either state’s law. The court therefore treated the amount of damages as the remaining issue.
Miller supported the damages request with his testimony, veterinary inspection certificates identifying Harshbarger as the consignee and contact person, and delivery receipts. The court found that this evidence established the requested damages by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning that the evidence showed the amount was more likely than not correct.
The court did not decide whether Miller adequately pleaded conversion or unjust enrichment. Because Miller sought the same damages under each theory and had sufficiently alleged breach of contract, the court found it unnecessary to evaluate those additional theories.
Disposition
Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright granted Miller’s motion for default judgment. The court ordered the clerk to enter judgment in favor of Miller and against Harshbarger for $170,334.50, consisting of $103,250 for the hogs and $67,084.50 for delivery costs.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.