# McCarthy v. DataX, Ltd.

> District Court, M.D. Florida · May 30, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11062746

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, M.D. Florida
- **Decided:** May 30, 2025
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11062746

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining that, when multiple defendants are jointly and severally liable, an inconsistent judgment might result if one defendant successfully defended on the merits while default judgment was entered against another defendant

## Opinion text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION

MICHELLE MCCARTHY,

Plaintiff,
v. Case No.: 8:24-cv-02916-JLB-AAS

DATAX, LTD., et al.,

Defendants.
_____________________________________/

ORDER

Plaintiff Michelle McCarthy requests entry of clerk’s default against
Defendant Strategic Solutions Services, d/b/a Arrow Mountain Funding
(Strategic Solutions Services). (Doc. 41).
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a), “[w]hen a party against
whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or
otherwise defend, and that failure is shown by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk
must enter the party’s default.” The plaintiff filed her complaint with the
defendant on December 18, 2024. (Doc. 1). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
4(f)(1) permits serving an individual in a foreign country “by any intentionally
agreed means of service . . . such as those authorized by the Hague Convention
on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents.” Fed. R. Civ.
P. 4(f)(1). The United States and Canada are signatories to the Hague
Convention. “There is no dispute that the Hague Convention authorizes
personal service by a huissier/bailiff[.]” Tekno Prods., Inc. v. Glove Trends, Inc.,

et al., No. CV 19-91 (SDW)(LDW), 2019 WL 4228685, at *3 (D.N.J. July 26,
2019), report and recommendation adopted, No. 19-91 (SDW)(LDW), 2019 WL
4220901 (D.N.J. Sept. 5, 2019). A judicial bailiff served a copy of the summons
and complaint on an officer of Strategic Solutions Services on March 27, 2025.

(Doc. 40). Accordingly, service is proper, and entry of clerk’s default is
warranted. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(1).
In a lawsuit involving multiple parties, “the court may direct entry of a
final judgment as to one or more, but fewer than all, claims or parties only if

the court expressly determines that there is no just reason for delay.” Fed. R.
Civ. P. 54(b). However, the preferred practice in multi-defendant actions where
only some defendants are in default is to withhold granting a default judgment
against those defendants until there is an adjudication on the merits as to the

non-defaulted defendants. N. Pointe Ins. Co. v. Glob. Roofing & Sheet Metal,
Inc., No. 6:12-cv-476-Orl-31TBS, 2012 WL 5378826, at *4 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 4,
2012) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Courts take this
approach to avoid inconsistent judgments. See, e.g., Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v.

Bailey, 378 F. Supp. 3d 1213, 1221 (M.D. Ga. 2019) (citing Gulf Coast Fans,
Inc. v. Midwest Elecs. Imps., Inc., 740 F.2d 1499, 1512 (11th Cir. 1984));
Northfield Ins. Co. v. Browning Timber & Saw Mill, LLC, No. 4:17-cv-01236-
ACA, 2018 WL 3135970, at *2 (N.D. Ala. June 27, 2018); Zurich Am. Ins. Co.

v. Ednic Trading Corp., No. 13-62229-CIV, 2014 WL 869216, at *1 (S.D. Fla.
Mar. 5, 2014) (citations omitted).
Because RICO claims often result in joint and several liability, a default
judgment in a RICO case may result in inconsistent judgments. See United
States v. Philip Morris USA, 316 F. Supp. 2d 19, 27 (D.D.C. 2025); see also Vick

v. Wong, 263 F.R.D. 325, 332 (E.D. Va. 2009) (explaining that, when multiple
defendants are jointly and severally liable, an inconsistent judgment might
result if one defendant successfully defended on the merits while default
judgment was entered against another defendant). Accordingly, for the reasons
stated above, Ms. McCarthy’s request for entry of clerk’s default (Doc. 41) is
GRANTED. The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter default against Strategic
Solutions Services. Further, Ms. McCarthy’s request for a stay of the deadline
to apply for default judgment against Strategic Solutions Services until this
matter and any appeals are resolved (Doc. 41) is GRANTED.
ORDERED in Tampa, Florida on May 30, 2025.
Aranda. Are he Sarma.
AMANDA ARNOLD SANSONE |
United States Magistrate Judge

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11062746. Public record. Not legal advice.