Fedor v. Ribicoff

U.S. District Court

Decided October 8, 1962

U.S. District Court · decided 1962-10-08

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““No judgment by default shall be entered against the United States or an officer or agency thereof unless the claimant establishes his claim or right to relief by evidence satisfactory to the court.””

quoted by 2 later decisions, including Owenby v. Gardner, 681 F. Supp. 885 - Syva Co. v. United States

Relies on 142 F. Supp. 1 - Rank v. (Krug) United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1962-10-08

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 1988

1 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

JOSEPH S. LORD, III, District Judge.

¶1In this matter, an appeal from a dis-allowance of a social security claim, plaintiff has moved for default judgment on the ground that the defendant has failed for more than a reasonable time to file an answer.

¶2F.R.Civ.P. 55(e) provides: “No judgment by default shall be entered against the United States or an officer or agency thereof unless the claimant establishes his claim or right to relief by evidence satisfactory to the court.” Clearly, mere failure on the part of the United States to answer is no ground for entry of judgment against it. If plaintiff proceeds to establish his claim, and then satisfies the court as to waiver of sovereign immunity and service on the defendant, judgment may be entered against the defendant despite failure to appear. Cf. Rank v. (Krug) United States, 142 F.Supp. 1, (S.D.Cal., 1956). Having filed only his complaint, plaintiff’s motion must be denied as premature.