Taylor v. Strongbuilt, Inc.
| Decision Date | 23 September 2011 |
| Docket Number | CIVIL ACTION NO. 09-0806-KD-C |
| Parties | DOUGLAS TAYLOR and TONYA TAYLOR, Plaintiffs, v. STRONGBUILT, INC., and STRONGBUILT INTERNATIONAL, LLC., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Alabama |
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Douglas and Tonya Taylor's motions for default judgment wherein they seek default judgment against Defendants StrongBuilt, Inc. (StrongBuilt) and StrongBuilt International, LLC, (SBI) for failure to plead or otherwise defend. (docs. 24, 38). The Clerk entered default as to both defendants (docs. 26, 36). An evidentiary hearing was held August 25, 2011. The Taylors appeared, testified as to their respective claims and damages and provided documentary evidence in support. Neither StrongBuilt nor SBI appeared at the hearing or otherwise defended the motions. Upon consideration, and for the reasons set forth herein, the motions for default judgment are GRANTED.
In April 2008, defendants StrongBuilt and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. removed the Taylors' complaint to this Court (doc. 1, Civil Action No. 08-188-KD-C). Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. was dismissed from this action (docs. 32, 33, Civil Action No. 08-188-KD-C). StrongBuilt filed a motion for summary judgment alleging that the Taylors' claims were barred by its Chapter 11 bankruptcy action which had been filed in 2003 in the United States Bankruptcy Court, Western District of Louisiana, Monroe Division, Case No. 03-31317 and closed March 14, 2006 (doc. 27, Id.). After briefing concluded, StrongBuilt filed a suggestion of bankruptcy as to its successor,StrongBuilt International, LLC (doc. 49, Id.). This Court then referred this action to the Bankruptcy Court on finding that the Bankruptcy Court could best determine whether the Taylors' products liability claim against StrongBuilt had been discharged in its bankruptcy and whether liability for the claim has been assumed by SBI as the reorganized debtor (doc. 59).
The Bankruptcy Court entered a report and recommendation and lifted the automatic stay. The Western District of Louisiana then transferred this action back to this Court for final disposition (doc. 1, Civil Action No. 09-806-KD-C). In February 2010, this Court adopted the Bankruptcy Judge's report and recommendation and denied StrongBuilt's motion for summary judgment finding that the claim had not been discharged and that the Taylors may pursue their claim against SBI and StrongBuilt (doc. 12). The Taylors then filed their First Amended Complaint in this action to add SBI, the successor corporation, as a defendant (doc. 16). A preliminary scheduling order was entered and the deadline for the report of parties' planning meeting was extended twice (docs. 13, 18, 20).
In May 2010, counsel for StrongBuilt filed a motion to withdraw (doc. 21). The Magistrate Judge granted the motion and in that same order, scheduled a Rule 16(b) Scheduling Conference. Also, the Magistrate Judge warned StrongBuilt that it must appear through counsel at the conference and that failure to do so would subject it to appropriate sanctions, specifically those available under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A)(ii-vii) (doc. 22). Counsel also gave notice of the withdrawal to the corporate representative for StrongBuilt, Honda Killen, and gave notice that corporations could not proceed pro se1 and therefore counsel should be obtained (doc. 23). StrongBuilt did not appear at the conference. Since May 2010, no attorney has appeared on behalf of StrongBuilt and it did not answer the First Amended Complaint.
In December 2010, the Taylors' filed their pending motion for default judgment as toStrongBuilt and SBI (doc. 24). As grounds, the Taylors' allege that the parties were ordered to appear for a Rule 16(b) Scheduling Conference but did not do so. Construing the motion as an application for entry of default by the Clerk, default was entered as to StrongBuilt. However, entry of default as to SBI was denied because there was a question of proper service of the summons and First Amended Complaint upon SBI (doc. 26). After perfecting service upon SBI and its failure to answer the First Amended Complaint, the Taylors filed a second application for entry of default as to SBI (doc. 35). The Clerk entered default as to SBI in May 2011 (doc. 36). In June 2011, the Taylors filed their pending motion for default judgment as to SBI for failure to plead or otherwise defend this action (doc. 38).
An evidentiary hearing on both motions was scheduled for August 25, 2011. On July 11, 2011, notice of the hearing was mailed to the corporate representative (doc. 39). SBI and StrongBuilt did not appear at the hearing or otherwise defend the motions.
In their First Amended Complaint, the Taylors' bring Count One for breach of implied warranty pursuant to Code of Alabama §§ 7-2-314, 7-2-315; Count Two pursuant to the Alabama Extended Manufacturer's Liability Doctrine; Count Three for negligence; Count Four for wantonness; and Count Five for damages for loss of consortium (doc. 16). The Taylors seek compensatory and punitive damages.
Upon consideration of the pleadings and the evidence presented at the hearing, the Court makes the following findings of fact:
On or about January 1, 2005, Douglas Taylor purchased a StrongBuilt Renegade Fixed Deer Stand from WalMart Stores, Inc., which was manufactured by StrongBuilt (doc. 16, First Amended Complaint).
On or about December 18, 2005, after "having been mounted and connected as provided by the retailer WalMart, and the manufacturer, StrongBuilt", the tree stand "failed as the metal connection sheered off of the tree stand proximately resulting in . . . [Douglas] being catapultedfrom the tree a distance of some thirty (30) feet." (doc. 16, p. 1-2). The tree stand was warranted and intended for "use as a tree stand capable of handling weight of two hundred fifty (250) pounds and represented to be capable of supporting" Douglas (Id.). When the tree stand reached Douglas, the "ultimate user or consumer", "it was without any substantial change in its condition from the time it was sold and manufactured by the Defendants." (doc. 16, p. 4).
Douglas sustained a "cervical neck fracture2 as well as internal organ injuries" and "damage to his spinal cord", legs and feet" (doc. 16, p. 3). Douglas incurred medical expenses and will continue to incur such expenses in the future, was caused to lose wages and will continue to lose wages in the future, and suffered pain, severe mental anguish and emotional distress as a result of his injuries (Id.). Because of Douglas' injuries and consequent medical treatment, Tonya Taylor was caused to lose the consortium and society of Douglas. (Id., p. 8)
At the hearing, Douglas testified as follows: He has been married for seven years, is thirty-nine (39) years old, and works as a supervisor for a copier sales and repair company. He worked there before the accident and the company has made accommodations for his residual loss of function and absence from work for medical treatment and doctor appointments. Douglas anticipates that he would have to apply for disability if he lost this job because no other employer would accommodate his impairments.
Douglas bought the tree stand in 2005. When the stand collapsed, Douglas had disconnected the safety harness in order to exit the stand. He was turning to step down the ladder. When he took the first step, the stand collapsed and he fell approximately twenty to twenty-five feet landing on his feet. He was transported to the hunting camp, taken by ambulance to a local hospital where he was stabilized, and then transferred to the University of South Alabama Trauma Center where he was hospitalized for four days.
Douglas was diagnosed with a fractured L-2 vertebrae, dislocated hip, broken ribs, and bruising damage to his internal organs. Douglas received physical therapy and rehabilitation and ultimately had back surgery which did not relieve the pain. Also, additional surgeries were necessary after the accident and jaw surgery is likely in the future because of medication side effects. He has lost about seven teeth in two years.
Douglas will be under the care of a pain management neurologist for the rest of his life and takes as much as twelve different medications on a daily basis. The medications have to be monitored and intermittently changed because they lose efficacy to treat his pain and there is potential for liver damage. He also has monthly medical appointments with his several treating physicians including twice monthly appointments with his neurologist. Douglas describes the pain as lasting twenty four hours and never completely stops. He sleeps two to three hours per night and has been counseled for living with chronic pain.
Before the fall, Douglas played softball, hunted, fished, and coached sports. He can no longer participate in these activities. Now he cannot drive long distances or sit for long periods of time. He cannot run, cannot lift more than fifteen pounds or stand longer than fifteen minutes and his walking is limited. One of his physicians has given him an impairment rating of 5% but there is some dispute among his doctors as to whether the rating should be higher. The medications affect his short term memory and therefore, his wife Tanya must accompany him to his medical appointments. Also, Douglas no longer handles the family finances, cannot help as much around the house, and can do only limited yard work.
At the hearing, Tanya Taylor testified as follows:
The Taylors have been married for seven years. His injuries and consequent pain have caused emotional stress and affected their marriage. He cannot help her with many routine household chores and their social activities are now limited. Tanya also worries about the long term effects of the many different medications upon Douglas. She handles all the household finances including...
To continue reading
Request your trial