Filed: Aug. 18, 2016
Latest Update: Aug. 18, 2016
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION SHARON LOVELACE BLACKBURN , Senior District Judge . On July 7, 2016, the court ordered defendant Charles Matsos to appear and show cause why he should not be sanctioned for failing to appear for a Status Conference as ordered by the court. (Doc. 37.) 1 Mr. Matsos again failed to appear or to otherwise contact the court. After his attorney was allowed to withdraw, Mr. Matsos has repeatedly and willfully failed to appear and has unreasonably delayed and/or interfered with
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION SHARON LOVELACE BLACKBURN , Senior District Judge . On July 7, 2016, the court ordered defendant Charles Matsos to appear and show cause why he should not be sanctioned for failing to appear for a Status Conference as ordered by the court. (Doc. 37.) 1 Mr. Matsos again failed to appear or to otherwise contact the court. After his attorney was allowed to withdraw, Mr. Matsos has repeatedly and willfully failed to appear and has unreasonably delayed and/or interfered with e..
More
MEMORANDUM OPINION
SHARON LOVELACE BLACKBURN, Senior District Judge.
On July 7, 2016, the court ordered defendant Charles Matsos to appear and show cause why he should not be sanctioned for failing to appear for a Status Conference as ordered by the court. (Doc. 37.)1 Mr. Matsos again failed to appear or to otherwise contact the court. After his attorney was allowed to withdraw, Mr. Matsos has repeatedly and willfully failed to appear and has unreasonably delayed and/or interfered with expeditious management of this case.2 The court finds that a lesser sanction would not serve the interests of justice as, despite numerous opportunities, Mr. Matsos has refused to participate in this matter.
Rule 16(f) provides "the court may issue any just orders, including those authorized by Rule 37(b)(2)(A)(ii)-(vii),3 if a party or its attorney . . . fails to appear at a scheduling or other pretrial conference. . . ." Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(f)(1)(A). "The sanctions contained in Rule 16(f) were designed to punish . . . parties for conduct which unreasonably delays or otherwise interferes with the expeditious management of trial preparation." DIRECTV, Inc. v. Huynh, 318 F.Supp.2d 1122, 1127 (M.D. Ala. 2004)(quoting Goforth v. Owens, 766 F.2d 1533, 1535 (11th Cir. 1985)).
The court finds that, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(f), entry of a default judgment in favor of plaintiff and against defendant Charles Matsos is warranted under the facts and circumstances. See Giovanno v. Fabec, 804 F.3d 1361, 1365-66 (11th Cir. 2015). A separate Order entering a default judgment and allowing plaintiff time to file a statement of damages and attoreneys' fees will be entered contemporaneously with this Memorandum Opinion.
