Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 18, 2020

Jackson v. Pagan

Judge
Vincent Briccetti
Docket
7:20-cv-05176
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
6
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Jackson v. Pagan, Judge Briccetti denied Jackson’s motion for default judgment with prejudice because Pagan timely answered the complaint.

Who this affects

Thomas Jackson’s motion for default judgment was denied; Sergeant E. Pagan’s timely answer was recognized by the court.

What happened

In Jackson v. Pagan, Thomas Jackson asked the court to enter a default judgment against Sergeant E. Pagan. A default judgment is a judgment based on a defendant’s failure to respond.

The court found that Pagan’s attorney acknowledged service on September 11, 2020, making the response deadline November 11, 2020. Pagan filed an answer on November 10 and docketed proof that it was mailed to Jackson.

Judge Briccetti denied Jackson’s motion for default judgment with prejudice. The court also denied a fee-free appeal because it certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, and it directed the clerk to terminate the motion.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Jackson v. Pagan · No. 7:20-cv-05176
Judge
Vincent Briccetti
Date
Nov. 18, 2020

Background

Thomas Jackson moved for entry of default judgment against Sergeant E. Pagan. Default judgment is a judgment entered when a defendant fails to respond to a complaint.

The Defendant’s Response

The court stated that Pagan was served by mail on September 11, 2020. Under the applicable local standing order, Pagan had 60 days from the mailing or delivery of a completed acknowledgment of receipt to file and serve an answer or another responsive pleading. Pagan’s attorney acknowledged service on September 11, so the deadline was November 11, 2020.

Pagan filed an answer on November 10, 2020, and docketed proof that the answer had been served on Jackson by mail. The answer denied most allegations, admitted some allegations concerning Jackson’s status and Pagan’s role, and asserted several defenses, including failure to state a claim, official-capacity immunity under the Eleventh Amendment, qualified immunity, claim-preclusion doctrines, failure to exhaust administrative remedies, contributory conduct, and a New York statutory bar to certain state-law claims.

Ruling

Judge Vincent L. Briccetti denied Jackson’s motion for default judgment with prejudice because Pagan timely filed an answer. Because the court recognized that Jackson might not have received the answer, it attached a copy to the order and directed that it be mailed to him. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal. The clerk was instructed to terminate the motion.

The authoritative version

Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.