Waugh v. Oklahoma State of
5:11-cv-01419
W.D. Okla.Jun 9, 2017Background
- On August 28, 2010, plaintiff Michael Waugh fled a Jiffy Trip in Cleo Springs, OK, while two fugitive recovery agents, Robert Pettigrew and Michael Belcher, attempted to apprehend him; Pettigrew fired a Taser but missed.
- Pettigrew called Major County Sheriff’s Office; a search developed involving Deputy Phillips, off‑duty Reserve Deputy Justin Dow, and Joshua Dow (an un‑employed private individual given a gun and badge).
- About 90 minutes later, at a creek/river, Joshua Dow (prompted by Pettigrew and Belcher) fired two or three shots, hitting Waugh in the right femur; plaintiff alleges the men did not identify themselves.
- Waugh asserted federal constitutional claims (Fourth Amendment excessive force and unlawful warrantless arrest; Fourteenth substantive due process) and Oklahoma state-law claims (assault, battery, false arrest/imprisonment).
- Pettigrew and Belcher were properly served, did not answer, and the court entered default judgment liability under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2).
- The court granted default judgment as to liability but set a damages hearing (July 5, 2017) to determine reasonable compensatory medical, pain and suffering, and punitive damages, and to consider offsets for settlements with other defendants.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether default judgment for liability is warranted against Pettigrew and Belcher | Waugh contends defendants were served and failed to respond, so liability is established by default for alleged constitutional and state‑law violations | Pettigrew/Belcher did not respond (no defenses presented) | Court held default judgment appropriate under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2) because defendants were served and failed to answer |
| Whether plaintiff’s factual allegations are taken as true for liability | Waugh relies on complaint and record evidence compiled in prior R&R to establish the facts | No contest due to default | Court accepted well‑pleaded factual allegations as true for liability (excluding damages) |
| Whether damages may be awarded without a hearing | Waugh requested judgment for specific sums and said a hearing unnecessary | Court must ensure damages are reasonable and not duplicative of prior settlements | Court ordered a damages hearing because claimed amounts are not a purely liquidated sum and must be tested for reasonableness and overlap with other recoveries |
| Proper measure and proof of damages (medical, pain/suffering, punitive) | Waugh submitted billed medical amounts and seeks $200,000 pain/suffering and $200,000 punitive | Court must evaluate reasonableness and potential duplication with prior settlements | Court permitted additional evidence at hearing, will assess medical bills’ reasonableness, allow proof on pain/suffering and punitive damages, and consider offsets for prior settlements |
Key Cases Cited
- Hunt v. Inter-Globe Energy, Inc., 770 F.2d 145 (10th Cir. 1985) (default judgment on damages requires hearing unless amount is liquidated or mathematically calculable)
- United Phosphorus, Ltd. v. Midland Fumigant, Inc., 205 F.3d 1219 (10th Cir. 2000) (trial awards that duplicate recovery should be reduced to avoid double recovery)
- Woolard v. JLG Indus., Inc., 210 F.3d 1158 (10th Cir. 2000) (pain and suffering damages are discretionary and not proven by fixed formulas)
- Mathiason v. Aquinas Home Health Care, Inc., 187 F. Supp. 3d 1269 (D. Kan. 2016) (plaintiff seeking default judgment must show medical charges are reasonable to recover billed amounts)