From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Compton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Jan 10, 2012
Case No. 07-11851 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 10, 2012)

Opinion

Case No. 07-11851

01-10-2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. EWELL D. COMPTON, Defendant, and DETROIT BOARD OF EDUCATION, Garnishee.


Honorable Patrick J. Duggan


OPINION AND ORDER


At a session of said Court, held in the U.S.

District Courthouse, Eastern District

of Michigan, on January 10, 2012.


PRESENT: THE HONORABLE PATRICK J. DUGGAN

U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

On April 27, 2007, the United States of America filed this suit to recover student loan proceeds from Ewell Compton. Compton failed to defend the suit, and the Clerk of the Court entered a default and default judgment against him on July 9, 2007. The United States subsequently obtained writs of garnishment to receive Compton's state income tax refunds and a portion of his wages. Presently before the Court are Compton's motions to set aside the entry of default and vacate the default judgment. The Court referred these motions to Magistrate Judge Paul J. Komives pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).

On November 15, 2011, Magistrate Judge Komives issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") in which he recommends that this Court deny Compton's motions. Magistrate Judge Komives concludes that Compton has failed to show good cause justifying his failure to answer the Complaint, and thus, his own culpable conduct led to the entry of default and default judgment.

At the conclusion of the R&R, Magistrate Judge Komives advises the parties that they may object or seek review of the R&R within fourteen days of service upon them. R&R 8. He further advises the parties that "[f]ailure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any further right of appeal. Id. (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S. Ct. 466 (1985); Howard v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 932 F.2d 505, 508-09 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947, 950 (6th Cir. 1981)). No objections to the R&R have been filed.

The Court has carefully reviewed the R&R and concurs with the conclusions reached by Magistrate Judge Komives.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Defendant's motion to set aside the default is DENIED;

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's motion for an order vacating the judgment is DENIED.

PATRICK J. DUGGAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies to:

Ewell D. Compton

17361 Cherrylawn Street

Detroit, MI 48221

Charles Holzman, Esq.

Marquita H. Sylvia, Esq.

Magistrate Judge Paul J. Komives


Summaries of

United States v. Compton

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
Jan 10, 2012
Case No. 07-11851 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 10, 2012)
Case details for

United States v. Compton

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. EWELL D. COMPTON, Defendant, and…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Jan 10, 2012

Citations

Case No. 07-11851 (E.D. Mich. Jan. 10, 2012)