FTC denied default judgment against MOBE corporate defendants
Back in February default was entered against Matt Lloyd and the MOBE corporate defendants.
Citing communication misunderstandings, Lloyd managed to get his entry of default set aside in April.
Default against the MOBE corporate defendants still stood however, prompting the FTC to file for default judgment in early May.
In a July 1st order the court denied the FTC’s motion, citing technicalities pertaining to potentially conflicting judgments.
In the FTC’s lawsuit against MOBE, Lloyd and the MOBE corporate defendants are “jointly and severally liable”.
Given that the Court vacated the Clerk’s default entered against Defendant McPhee and that Defendant McPhee appears to be participating in this action, the Court finds that a default
judgment against the MOBE Corporate Defendants risks offending the prohibition against inconsistent judgments.
Therefore, the Court finds that the Motion is due to be denied without prejudice.
Going forward, the FTC has been given the opportunity to brief the court on how granting default against the MOBE corporate defendants ‘does not risk offending the prohibition against inconsistent judgments.‘
Should Plaintiff decide to file a renewed motion for default judgment as to the MOBE Corporate Defendants, Plaintiff shall address the issue of inconsistent judgments with respect to Defendant McPhee, Defendant Whitney, and any other parties to this case … if a default judgment were to be entered against the MOBE Corporate Defendants.
The FTC has been given till July 29th to file a renewed motion addressing the above issues.
If they don’t wish to pursue the matter at this time, the court has also advised they can wait for claims against Lloyd and co-defendant Russel Whitney to be resolved – after which they can again pursue default judgement against the MOBE corporate defendants.
Pending settlement, Matt Lloyd and the FTC are scheduled to face off in court in May 2020.