EVANSTON INSURANCE COMPANY
v.
WAYFAIR, LLC
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Evanston Insurance Company sought a clerk's entry of default against defendant JLBC Corporation for failure to respond. The court denied the motion, finding that service of process on JLBC was improper and therefore a default could not be entered.
The court held that Plaintiff did not properly serve JLBC Corporation. Service was improper because the Return of Service did not identify the person who received service as an officer, managing agent, or other authorized agent of the corporation as required by Rule 4(h) and Florida law.
[1] A plaintiff must properly serve a summons and complaint before a default may be entered against a defendant.
[2] Service of process upon a corporation in the United States must be made by delivering a copy of the summons and complaint to an officer, a managing or general agent, or a…
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“a plaintiff must serve the summons and the complaint properly before a default may be entered”
Establishes the prerequisite for default entry—proper service of process is mandatory.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Evanston Insurance Company filed suit against multiple defendants including JLBC Corporation. Plaintiff attempted service on JLBC by deliver…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Clerk'S Entry Of Default cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause comes before the Court upon Plaintiff's Motion for Clerk's Entry of Default against Defendant JLBC Corporation (“JLBC") (Doc. 20). By the Motion, Plaintiff requests a clerk's entry of default against JLBC pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a). “When 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.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). However, a plaintiff must serve the summons and the complaint properly before a default may be entered. United States v. Demesmin, No. 6:17-CV- 36-ORL-31KRS, 2018 WL 1988864, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 14, 2018). As explained below, Plaintiff did not properly serve JLBC.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(h) governs service of process upon corporations, partnerships, or associations and provides:
a domestic or foreign corporation, or a partnership or other unincorporated association that is subject to suit under a common name, must be served:
(1) in a judicial district of the United States:
(A) in the manner prescribed by Rule 4(e)(1) for serving an individual; or
(B) by delivering a copy of the summons and of the complaint to an officer, a managing or general agent, or any other agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service of process and if the agent is one authorized by statute and the statute so requires by also mailing a copy of each to the defendant; or
(2) at a place not within any judicial district of the United States, in any manner prescribed by Rule 4(f) for serving an individual, except personal delivery under (f)(2)(C)(i).
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(h). Here, the Return of Service filed by Plaintiff indicates that a "Jane Doe as Co-Resident of RA for JLBC Corporation” received service for JLBC at the alternate address of 2015 W. Kirby Street, Tampa, Florida. Such service is not compliant with the rule. Rule(4)(e)(1) states that an individual may be served by following the law for service of process in the state where the district court is located. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e)(1). Here, Florida law provides a hierarchy for service of process upon a corporation. A private corporation may be served by serving process on the president, vice president, or other head of the corporation, and in the absence of any such persons, on other corporate employees, including any officer or director. Fla. Stat. § 48.081(1)(a)-(d). However, the return of service filed in this matter does not identify Ms. Doe as any such person. Moreover, Ms. Doe has not been identified as an officer, managing agent, or other individual authorized to accept service, the other method for effectuating service under Rule 4(h). To the contrary, the identity of Ms. Doe as a whole is completely unknown. Accordingly, it is hereby
2
ORDERED: 1. On or before April 2, 2025, Plaintiff shall either: 1) file an amended return of service which contains which contains sufficient information for the Court to determine whether JLBC was properly served pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(h) or 2) show cause in writing why this Court should not deny plaintiff's request for entry of a clerk's default as to JLBC.
DONE AND ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on this 19th day of March 2025.
ANTHONY E. PORCELLI
United States Magistrate Judge
cc: Counsel of Record
3
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Evanston Ins. Co. v. Wayfair, LLC, 2018 WL 1988864 (M.D. Fla. 2025)…y affidavit or otherwise, the clerk must enter the party's default.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). However, a plaintiff must serve the summons and the complaint properly before a default may be entered. United States v. Demesmin, No. 6:17-CV- 36-ORL-31KRS, 2018 WL 1988864, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 14, 2018). As explained below, Plaintiff did not properly serve JLBC. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(h) governs service of process upon corporations, partnerships, or associations and provides: ---PAGE 2--- Case 8:24-cv-0…
-
Fitzgerald v. Trans Union, LLC (M.D. Fla. 2025)…hat she was authorized to accept service of process and then accepted service, that is not conclusive as to whether Barfield was actually authorized to receive process on behalf of FedChoice. See United States v. Demesmin, No. 6:17- cv-36-ORL-31KRS, 2018 WL 1988864, at *3 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 14, 2018) (finding that an individual's statement indicating that he or she is authorized to receive service of process and subsequent acceptance of service does not prove that the individual was actually authorized to receive…
-
Signature Flight Support LLC v. Cella (M.D. Fla. 2025)…the process server that he was authorized to accept service and then accepted service, that is not conclusive as to whether Jorge was actually authorized to receive process on behalf of Plaza. See United States v. Demesmin, No. 6:17-cv-36-ORL-31KRS, 2018 WL 1988864, at *3 (M.D. Fla. Mar. 14, 2018) (finding that an individual's statement indicating that he or she is authorized to receive service of process and subsequent acceptance of service does not prove that the individual was actually authorized to receive…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Evanston Ins. Co. v. Wayfair, LLC, 2018 WL 1988864 (M.D. Fla. 2025)