Opinion

American Southern Insurance Company v. Creative Scapes LLC

Court
District Court, N.D. Alabama
Filed
Dec 19, 2019
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 16.5%

The opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHEASTERN DIVISION

AMERICAN SOUTHERN )

INSURANCE COMPANY, a Kansas )

Corporation, )

)

Plaintiff, ) Case No.: 5:19-cv-0155-LCB

)

v. )

)

CREATIVE SCAPES, LLC, an )

Alabama Limited Liability Company,

and RICHARD MARANVILLE, an

individual,

Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This case arises out of an alleged breach of contract by the Defendants,

Creative Scapes, LLC, and its sole member and manager, Richard Maranville. This

Court has diversity jurisdiction over the matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332, because,

according to the complaint, the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, and the

parties are of diverse citizenship.1 Venue is proper in the Northeastern Division of

the Northern District of Alabama because the Defendants maintain their principal

place of business and residence in Madison County, Alabama, and the facts

1 The Plaintiff is incorporated under the laws of Kansas, Defendant Creative Scapes is a limited

liability company organized and existing under the laws of Alabama, and Defendant Richard

Maranville is an adult resident of Madison County, Alabama.

underlying the claims asserted in the complaint occurred in this judicial district. See

28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).

Background

This Court has reviewed the complaint and finds that it adequately states

viable causes of action under Alabama law. According to the complaint, the

Defendants entered into a subcontract with Denark2 Construction in which the

Defendants were to perform “rough carpentry and general trades work on a project

known as the Grissom High School Project in Madison County, Alabama.” (Doc.

1, p. 2). The subcontract sum was $372,600.00. The Plaintiff, American Southern

Insurance Company (“American Southern”), issued a subcontract performance bond

in the amount of $372,600.00 naming Creative Scapes as the principal, American

Southern as surety, and Denark as obligee.

According to the complaint, the Defendants failed to timely perform their

obligations under the contract. Therefore, Denark called upon American Southern

to fulfill Creative Scapes’s contractual obligations. In its motion for default

judgment, American Southern alleges that it paid Denark a total of $300,000 to fully

satisfy its obligations under the performance bond. American Southern also alleges

that it has paid attorney’s fees including costs and expenses as well as construction-

2 According to the complaint, Denark, who is not a party to this action, was the general contractor

under a contract with the Huntsville City Board of Education.

consulting fees in connection with the bond claim. These are the amounts that

American Southern seeks to recover in this action.

The Plaintiff filed its complaint on January 28, 2019, and the record indicates

that each Defendant was served on April 22, 2019.3 (Docs. 7 and 8). Accordingly,

the Defendants were required to file an answer or other responsive pleading by May

13, 2019. See Rule 12(a)(1)(A)(i), Fed. R. Civ. P. However, neither Defendant did

so. Consequently, on motion of the Plaintiff, the Clerk entered default as to both

Defendants on June 17, 2019, pursuant to Rule 55(a), Fed. R. Civ. P. (Docs. 11 and

12). The Plaintiff attached to its motion an affidavit stating that the Defendants were

personally served with copies of the complaint; that the Defendants were not minors,

incompetents, and/or active military; and that the Defendants had failed to plead or

otherwise respond to the complaint. Therefore, the Clerk’s entry of default was

proper.

On July 9, 2019, the Plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment as to both

Defendants. (Doc. 13). On November 5, 2019, this Court issued show-cause orders

to both Defendants giving them until November 22, 2019, to show cause as to why

the Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment should not be granted. See (Docs. 19 and

20). The orders were sent by certified mail to the same address at which both

3 In its affidavit filed in support of its motion for Clerk’s entry of default, Plaintiff’s counsel

stated that it hired a process server who personally served Mr. Maranville and his company,

Creative Scapes, LLC, at 185 Raleigh Way, Huntsville, AL 35811.

Defendants were personally served with copies of the complaint. However, the

orders were returned to the Clerk as “Unclaimed” and “Unable to Forward.” (Doc.

21). The Court has received no further response from either Defendant.

Discussion

Rule 55(b), Fed. R. Civ. P., provides:

(b) Entering a Default Judgment.

(1) By the Clerk. If the plaintiff's claim is for a sum certain or a sum

that can be made certain by computation, the clerk--on the

plaintiff's request, with an affidavit showing the amount due--

must enter judgment for that amount and costs against a

defendant who has been defaulted for not appearing and who is

neither a minor nor an incompetent person.

(2) By the Court. In all other cases, the party must apply to the court

for a default judgment. A default judgment may be entered

against a minor or incompetent person only if represented by a

general guardian, conservator, or other like fiduciary who has

appeared. If the party against whom a default judgment is sought

has appeared personally or by a representative, that party or its

representative must be served with written notice of the

application at least 7 days before the hearing. The court may

conduct hearings or make referrals--preserving any federal

statutory right to a jury trial--when, to enter or effectuate

judgment, it needs to:

(A) conduct an accounting;

(B) determine the amount of damages;

(C) establish the truth of any allegation by evidence; or

(D) investigate any other matter.

As noted, the Clerk entered default as to both Defendants on June 17, 2019, and the

Plaintiff filed a motion for a default judgment with the Court on July 9, 2019.

Although the Court permits the Clerk of Court to enter default when appropriate

pursuant to Rule 55(a), it is the practice of the judges of this court to reserve all

decisions about the entry of a Rule 55(b) default judgment for the discretion of the

particular judge to which the case is assigned, even when Rule 55(b)(1) permits the

Clerk of Court to enter a default judgment because the plaintiff’s claim against a

defendant is for a sum certain or for a sum which can by computation be made

certain. Thus, Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 13) is properly before

the undersigned. As discussed above, the Court finds that all the requirements of

Rule 55, Fed. R. Civ. P., have been met. Accordingly, entry of a default judgment

is proper.

As to damages, the Plaintiff asserts that it is entitled to $317,464.90. That

amount includes the $300,000.00 paid to Denark in satisfaction of the performance

bond; $3,952.50 paid to Boudwin Consulting, Inc., a construction-consulting firm

hired to determine the cost of completing the work allegedly left unfinished by the

Defendants; $10,051.70 in attorney’s fees paid to Wright Green, P.C., in connection

with the performance bond claim; and $3,460.70 in attorney’s fees, costs, and

expenses paid to Starnes, Davis, Florie, LLP, in connection with the present matter.

The Plaintiff attached to its motion an affidavit from John Northrup, the

Assistant Vice President of Surety Claims for National Claims Services, Inc.

National Claims Services, Inc., investigates claims made against payment and

performance bonds issued by the Plaintiff. See (Doc. 13-1, 13-2, and 13-3). In his

affidavit, Mr. Northrop detailed the monetary amounts listed in the previous

paragraph and asserted that they are reasonable in this particular case. Mr. Northrop

also attached invoices from Boudwin Consulting and from both law firms itemizing

the fees and expenses claimed. Mr. Northrop attached copies of checks from the

Plaintiff to the above-mentioned firms for the amounts claimed in his affidavit.

Under Rule 55(b), a final default judgment may be entered by the Court

without a hearing if the claim “is for a sum certain or a sum that can be made by

computation” upon the Plaintiff's request with an affidavit showing the amount due.

Rule 55(b)(1), Fed. R. Civ. P.; See United States Artist Corp. v. Freeman, 605 F. 2d

854, 857 (5th Cir.1979) (“The case law is clear that a judgment by default may not

be entered without a hearing unless the amount claimed is a liquidated sum or one

capable of mathematical calculation.”)(citations omitted). Damages may be

awarded if the record adequately reflects the basis for such an award through “a

hearing or a demonstration by detailed affidavits establishing the necessary facts.”

Adolph Coors Co. v. Movement Against Racism & the Klan, 777 F.2d 1538, 1544

(11th Cir. 1985)(citations omitted). The Court has reviewed Mr. Northrop’s detailed

affidavit along with the attached itemized invoices and checks and is satisfied that

the damages sought by the Plaintiff are reasonable and are for a sum that is easily

calculated. The Plaintiff is therefore entitled to judgment against the Defendants in

the amount of $317,464.90. A separate final judgment will be entered

contemporaneously with this Memorandum Opinion.

DONE and ORDERED December 19, 2019.

th □□

LILES C. BURKE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.