Gilliam v. Discover Bank
- Jesse Furman
- 1:22-cv-07513
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Gilliam v. Discover Bank, Judge Furman denied the plaintiffs’ default-judgment motion and ordered Discover Bank to respond.
The plaintiffs, including James Gilliam and Laura Gilliam, and Discover Bank.
What happened
In Gilliam v. Discover Bank, the plaintiffs asked the court to enter a default judgment against Discover Bank on November 16, 2022.
Discover Bank opposed the request, arguing that it had not been properly served because the attorney who received service was not authorized to accept it.
The court denied the default-judgment motion and ordered Discover Bank to answer or otherwise respond by January 20, 2023. Judge Furman said the dispute should generally be resolved on its merits, and the case otherwise would remain stayed.
The detailed version
- Gilliam v. Discover Bank · No. 1:22-cv-07513
- Jesse Furman
- Dec. 13, 2022
Background
On November 16, 2022, Plaintiffs James Gilliam and others moved for default judgment against Defendant Discover Bank. Discover Bank opposed the motion on December 10, 2022. It argued primarily that service was defective because the attorney served by Plaintiffs was not authorized to accept service for Discover Bank.
Ruling
The court denied the motion for default judgment. It gave two reasons: Discover Bank had a colorable argument that it was not properly served, and there is a strong preference for resolving disputes on their merits.
The court ordered Discover Bank to file an answer or otherwise respond to the complaint by January 20, 2023. It stated that the case otherwise would remain stayed. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the docket entries for the motion and another filing, and to mail a copy of the order to Plaintiff Laura Gilliam.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.