1:22-cv-40107
D. Mass.Jul 31, 2024Background
- Leroy Gardner sued Arlene James under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging discriminatory remarks about his race/ethnicity by James while teaching at Quinsigamond Community College in 2021.
- Gardner initially served the original complaint (official capacity only) properly, but the amended complaint (individual capacity) was left at James’ former address in May 2023, after she had moved.
- The Clerk entered default after James failed to answer; subsequent notices to the old address were returned undeliverable.
- James was effectively served with notice of the default judgment motion at her new address and appeared pro se at the hearing.
- At the hearing, James credibly established she had moved multiple times before service of the amended complaint and did not willfully evade service.
- The court determined that proper service of the amended complaint had not been made and considered whether there was good cause to set aside the default.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was James properly served with the amended complaint? | Service at North Oxford condo sufficed. | Did not live there; never received amended complaint. | Service was not proper as the address was outdated. |
| Should default judgment be granted? | Entitled to default due to no answer. | Never properly served, so default should be set aside. | Motion for default judgment denied; default set aside. |
| Did James willfully evade service? | No evidence otherwise. | No; moved and forwarded mail, not evading service. | No willful evasion; James acted in good faith. |
| Is there prejudice to setting aside default? | Prejudice presumed due to delay. | No prejudice; matter can be litigated on merits. | No prejudice; case should proceed on the merits. |
Key Cases Cited
- Blair v. City of Worcester, 522 F.3d 105 (1st Cir. 2008) (return of service as prima facie evidence and burden shift for service challenges)
- Indigo Am., Inc. v. Big Impressions, LLC, 597 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2010) (good cause factors for setting aside entry of default)
- Rivera–Lopez v. Municipality of Dorado, 979 F.2d 885 (1st Cir. 1992) (plaintiff bears burden to prove proper service once challenged)
- Coon v. Grenier, 867 F.2d 73 (1st Cir. 1989) (prejudice for setting aside default requires more than ordinary litigation delay)
- United States v. Tobins, 483 F. Supp. 2d 68 (D. Mass. 2007) (valid service requires defendant to reside at service address)