Cabrera v. Freedom Mortgage Corp
- Rochon
- 1:23-cv-10556
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
Cabrera v. Freedom Mortgage: Judge Rochon ordered an explanation for Defendants’ late answer before considering default judgment.
Lolita Cabrera and the defendants, Freedom Mortgage Corporation and Mortgage Electronic Registrations Inc.; the order specifically requires an explanation for the defendants’ late answer before the court considers whether default judgment should be entered.
What happened
In Cabrera v. Freedom Mortgage Corp., Lolita Cabrera sued Freedom Mortgage Corporation and Mortgage Electronic Registrations Inc. The defendants were served on December 5, 2023, and their deadline to respond was December 26, 2023, but they filed an answer on January 10, 2024.
Cabrera did not agree to the late answer. The court ordered Defendant to file a letter of no more than three pages explaining why the late answer should be allowed and why the court should not enter default judgment. The letter was due February 5, 2024.
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon issued this order on January 29, 2024. The order did not decide whether the late answer would be accepted or whether default judgment would be entered.
The detailed version
- Cabrera v. Freedom Mortgage Corp · No. 1:23-cv-10556
- Rochon
- Jan. 29, 2024
Background
The defendants were served with the summons and complaint on December 5, 2023. Their deadline to answer or otherwise respond was December 26, 2023. They filed an answer on January 10, 2024, after that deadline had passed. The opinion states that the plaintiff, who was proceeding without a lawyer, did not consent to the late answer.
Order
The court directed Defendant to file a letter no longer than three pages by February 5, 2024. The letter must explain why, under the standards identified by the court, the belated answer is permissible and why default judgment should not be entered. Default judgment is a judgment that may be entered when a party fails to respond as required.
Disposition and effect
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon ordered the explanation but did not rule in this order on whether the late answer would be accepted or whether default judgment would be entered. The Clerk of Court was directed to send the order to the pro se plaintiff by email and mail.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.