Sussex Farms, Ltd. v. Mbanefo, 1:22-cv-01701

Plaintiff Sussex Farms sued Defendant Dr. Charles Mbanefo; Defendant's counsel withdrew near the discovery deadline.
The Court warned Defendant in a scheduling order that failure to appear at a status conference could result in sanctions, including a default judgment.
Defendant, notified by both docketed order and direct email (including a high-priority notice), failed to appear at the conference.
The Court entered a default judgment as a sanction under Rule 16(f); Defendant moved to set it aside, arguing excusable neglect due to his wife's hospitalization.
New counsel appeared for Defendant ten days after the default, and Defendant filed for relief shortly after, citing lack of bad faith and arguing for leniency.
Plaintiff opposed the motion, claiming prejudice due to further litigation and asserting Defendant’s conduct was dilatory.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether default judgment was a proper sanction for non-appearance	Defendant had notice, failed to appear after explicit warning, conduct appeared dilatory	Non-appearance due to excusable neglect (wife’s medical emergency), no intent to delay	Default judgment vacated; lesser sanction appropriate
Whether Defendant’s conduct showed bad faith or willful non-compliance	Conduct was dilatory and potentially willful, frustrating litigation	No bad faith, single incident, justified by emergency, not a pattern	No pattern of bad faith; no legal prejudice to Plaintiff
Whether Plaintiff suffered legal prejudice from Defendant’s non-appearance	Further litigation constitutes prejudice	No material prejudice, only slight delay	No legal prejudice established
Whether a lesser sanction would ensure compliance	Only default judgment would suffice	Lesser sanction sufficient to compel compliance	Lesser sanction imposed (fees), default judgment threat retained

Prime Rate Premium Fin. Corp. v. Larson, 930 F.3d 759 (6th Cir. 2019) (Rule 60(b) is a proper vehicle to seek relief from a default judgment under Rule 16(f))
United Coin Meter Co. v. Seaboard Coastline R.R., 705 F.2d 839 (6th Cir. 1983) (Default judgment is a harsh sanction, reserved for extreme circumstances)
Shepard Claims Serv., Inc. v. William Darrah & Assocs., 796 F.2d 190 (6th Cir. 1986) (Courts have a strong preference for trial on the merits over default judgment)
Freeland v. Amigo, 103 F.3d 1271 (6th Cir. 1997) (Default judgment factors: bad faith, prejudice, warning, and whether lesser sanctions suffice)
Schafer v. City of Defiance Police Dep’t, 529 F.3d 731 (6th Cir. 2008) (Willful and dilatory conduct relevant to imposing sanctions)