Moore v. Jan

Background

Jordan H. Moore, representing himself, filed this action on December 10, 2018, against Nurse Jan Gigi, Nurse Jan Veronica, C.C.S. Medical, Sgt. Davis, John Doe Helmet #43, Assistant Warden Keith Camera, Sgt. Conkling #201, and Westchester County. The court’s December 21, 2018 Order of Service dismissed the claims against Nurse Jan Gigi, Nurse Jan Veronica, and C.C.S. Medical and directed Moore to file an amended complaint naming the John Doe defendant.

Service was completed on C.O. Westchester County, Sergeant Davis, Assistant Warden Keith Camera, and Sergeant Conkling. After more than a year of inactivity, the court issued an order requiring Moore to explain why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Moore responded that his property, including legal mail, had been lost during a transfer to another correctional facility. The court decided not to dismiss the case for failure to prosecute and advised Moore to pursue default judgment because the defendants had not appeared or otherwise defended the action.

After further reminders, Moore moved for default judgment on August 8, 2022. On August 10, 2022, the Clerk entered a Certificate of Default against the defendants. The defendants later filed an answer on April 24, 2023, and, with the court’s permission, moved on September 18, 2023, to vacate the default judgment. The opinion states that Moore had not opposed that motion as of the order’s date.

Ruling

The court stated that a motion to vacate a default judgment is within the district judge’s discretion and that default judgments are viewed as a severe sanction. Because courts generally prefer resolving cases on their merits, the court said doubts should be resolved in favor of the party seeking to vacate the default. The court also cited the rule allowing relief from a final judgment for mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.

The court granted the defendants’ motion to vacate default judgment. It directed the Clerk to vacate the Certificate of Default. This order did not decide whether Moore’s underlying claims were valid.

Next Steps Ordered by the Court

Moore was directed to file an amended complaint naming the John Doe defendant by June 14, 2024. The amended complaint must replace, rather than supplement, the original complaint. The court stated that it would screen the amended complaint and, if necessary, direct the Clerk to assist with service on the named John Doe defendant.

The defendants were directed to answer the amended complaint or notify the court that they intended to move to dismiss it by July 5, 2024. If they moved to dismiss, the order set service deadlines of July 26, 2024, for their moving papers; August 26, 2024, for Moore’s opposition; and September 16, 2024, for their reply. The motion papers were to be filed on September 16, 2024.