ROUZARD
v.
ED MORSE CADILLAC BRANDON
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.
The court denied plaintiff's application for entry of default against defendant Ed Morse Cadillac Brandon because proper service was not effected. The plaintiff attempted to serve the defendant by email with a self-prepared summons that lacked the clerk's signature and the court's seal, which does not comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4.
The court held that the plaintiff did not effect proper service. The plaintiff's method of service—emailing a self-prepared, unsigned summons without the court's seal—does not constitute proper service under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4. Accordingly, the prerequisites for a clerk's default were not satisfied.
[1] Proper service of process is a prerequisite to a clerk's entry of default.
[2] A summons must be signed by the Clerk of Court and bear the Court's seal to be valid.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Proper service is a prerequisite to a clerk's default.”
Establishes the fundamental requirement that must be met before default can be entered.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff filed a motion seeking entry of a clerk's default pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). The proof of service relied upon by plaintiff consisted…
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 Proper Service Of Process cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE is before the undersigned on Plaintiff's Application for Entry of Default ("Motion”). Doc. 15. In the Motion, Plaintiff seeks entry of a Clerk's default pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Id. at 1.
Proper service is a prerequisite to a clerk's default. See Staley v. Health First, Inc., No. 6:24-cv-621-CEM-LHP, 2024 WL 2815858, at *1 (M.D. Fla. June 3, 2024). The “proof of service" upon which Plaintiff relies in the Motion indicates that Plaintiff emailed a copy of the Complaint to Defendant accompanied by a “summons” apparently prepared by Plaintiff that, among other defects, is not signed by the Clerk and does not bear the Court's seal. See Doc. 7; Doc. 7-1; Doc. 7-2; see also Doc. 15 at 1.
Plaintiff cites no authority that such constitutes proper service. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4; see also Chavez v. Grill Enterprises, LLC, No. 20-cv-22603, 2022 WL 4244017, at *2 n.1 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 15, 2022); Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Berfa Tires Corp., No. 6:20-cv-
2218-WWB-GJK, 2021 WL 8895131, at *2 (M.D. Fla. May 19, 2021); Martinez v. Deutsche Bank Nat. Tr. Co., No. 5:11-cv-580-Oc-10TBS, 2012 WL 140496, at *1-2 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 18, 2012).
Accordingly, the Motion (Doc. 15) is denied without prejudice.
DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida, on January 22, 2025.
Samuel J. Horovitz United States Magistrate Judge
Copies to:
Pro Se Plaintiff
2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rouzard v. Brandon, 2022 WL 4244017 (M.D. Fla. 2025)…e Clerk and does not bear the Court’s seal. See Doc. 7; Doc. 7-1; Doc. 7-2; see also Doc. 15 at 1. Plaintiff cites no authority that such constitutes proper service. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4; see also Chavez v. Grill Enterprises, LLC, No. 20-cv-22603, 2022 WL 4244017, at *2 n.1 (S.D. Fla. Sept. 15, 2022); Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Berfa Tires Corp., No. 6:20-cv- 2218-WWB-GJK, 2021 WL 8895131, at *2 (M.D. Fla. May 19, 2021); Martinez v. Deutsche Bank Nat. Tr. Co., No. 5:11-cv-580-Oc-10TBS, 2012 WL…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Rouzard v. Brandon, 2022 WL 4244017 (M.D. Fla. 2025)