From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Reynolds v. Auto. Club of Mo., Nonprofit Mut. Benefit Corp.

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit
Jun 17, 2014
561 F. App'x 559 (7th Cir. 2014)

Opinion

No. 14-1468

06-17-2014

ATRELLA REYNOLDS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF MISSOURI, a Missouri nonprofit mutual benefit corporation, Defendant-Appellee.


NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION


To be cited only in accordance with


Fed. R. App. P. 32.1


Before


FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge


ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge


DAVID F. HAMILTON, Circuit Judge


Appeal from the United

States District Court for the

Southern District of Illinois.


No. 12-cv-200-DRH-PMF

David R. Herndon,

Chief Judge.


Order

Last year, we held that plaintiff Atrella Reynolds had succeeded in serving process on AAA Texas, LLC, and on "AAA Auto Club Enterprises." Since neither had answered the complaint, we remanded with instructions to "decide whether to authorize another round of attempted service [on the proper defendant], or to declare AAA Texas in default and leave the three AAA entities to work out among themselves where the responsibility lies." Reynolds v. AAA Auto Club Enterprises, No. 13-1280 (7th Cir. May 23, 2013) (nonprecedential disposition).

On remand, the district court concluded that Automobile Club of Missouri is the only proper defendant, because the letter declining to hire Reynolds shows that it made the contested decision. The judge reformed the caption to remove AAA Texas and "AAA Auto Club Enterprises" as parties. (AAA Auto Club Enterprises appears to be a trade name rather than an organization; it is therefore not subject to suit. See Schiavone v. Fortune, 477 U.S. 21 (1986).) The district judge concluded that Automobile Club of Missouri is not in default. Reynolds never attempted to serve it directly, and it filed an answer after recognizing that Reynolds had presented a claim against it. The judge then entered summary judgment against Reynolds, ruling her suit untimely. Reynolds v. Automobile Club of Missouri, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21560 (S.D. Ill. Feb. 19, 2014).

Reynolds does not contest the ruling on timeliness. Instead she maintains that our 2013 decision required the district court to enter a default judgment against Automobile Club of Missouri. That assertion is incorrect. As the language we have quoted shows, we told the district court to decide whether to declare AAA Texas in default. The judge explained why he did not do this and has complied fully with our mandate. And even if the judge had declared AAA Texas in default, that would not have provided Reynolds with what she seeks now—a judgment against Automobile Club of Missouri.

AFFIRMED


Summaries of

Reynolds v. Auto. Club of Mo., Nonprofit Mut. Benefit Corp.

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit
Jun 17, 2014
561 F. App'x 559 (7th Cir. 2014)
Case details for

Reynolds v. Auto. Club of Mo., Nonprofit Mut. Benefit Corp.

Case Details

Full title:ATRELLA REYNOLDS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AUTOMOBILE CLUB OF MISSOURI, a…

Court:United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Date published: Jun 17, 2014

Citations

561 F. App'x 559 (7th Cir. 2014)

Citing Cases

Nasuti v. Whole Foods Mkt.

The only legal entity identified is WFM-WO, Inc.; a trade name is not subject to suit. Reynolds v. Automobile…