From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pushkin v. Nussbaum

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Aug 12, 2011
10 Civ. 9212 (JGK) (DCF (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 12, 2011)

Opinion

10 Civ. 9212 (JGK) (DCF.

August 12, 2011


MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER


Pro se plaintiff David Pushkin moves for a default judgment against defendants Aronsohn Weiner and Salerno, L.L.C. and Kevin L. Bremer. The plaintiff argues that a default judgment is proper because these defendants did not appear in response to the process that was mailed to them with an acknowledgment and waiver of service form earlier this year. However, it is plain that the defendants have not "failed to plead or otherwise defend" this case within the terms of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55, and thus a default judgment should not be entered. Any alleged failure to respond timely was not willful. Moreover, this Court maintains a strong preference for resolving disputes on the merits, rather than on the basis of procedural issues. See Enron Oil Corp. v. Diakuhara, 10 F.3d 90, 95 (2d Cir. 1993). The defendants have demonstrated a desire to defend against the claims in this case. Accordingly, the plaintiff's motion for a default judgment is denied. SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Pushkin v. Nussbaum

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Aug 12, 2011
10 Civ. 9212 (JGK) (DCF (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 12, 2011)
Case details for

Pushkin v. Nussbaum

Case Details

Full title:DAVID B. PUSHKIN, Plaintiff, v. BETH NUSSBAUM, ET AL., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Aug 12, 2011

Citations

10 Civ. 9212 (JGK) (DCF (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 12, 2011)

Citing Cases

Freedom Mortg. Corp. v. Meurer

Second, the Bullock court reasoned that courts maintain a “strong preference” for resolving disputes on the…

Fiedler v. Incandela

Pl.'s Opp'n at 6. Although the Court does not condone the Nassau County Defendants' blatant disregard for…