Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): The Court held a hearing on the motion on May 19, 2011. Attorney Dennis J. Mitchell represented Whitesell. There was no appearance on behalf of Defendants Smith Jones, Inc. d/b/a Midwest Manufacturing Co. (Smith Jones) or Amtek Auto Limited (Amtek) (collectively, Defendants) at the hearing. The matter is fully submitted and ready for disposition. I. BACKGROUND “If the court determines that the defendant is in default, his liability to the plaintiff is deemed established and the plaintiff is not required to establish his right to recover. The allegations of the complaint except as to the amount of damages are taken as true.” Brown v. Kenron Alum. & Glass Corp., 477 F.2d 526, 531 (8th Cir.1973) (quotation omitted); see also Stephenson v. El-Batrawi, 524 F.3d 907, 915 n. 9 (8th Cir.2008) (<HOLDING>). On September 30, 2008, Whitesell provided a 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that when deciding a motion for judgment on the pleadings the court must construe the material allegations in the complaint in favor of the nonmoving party as true (B) recognizing that the allegations of the complaint must be accepted as true on a threshold motion to dismiss (C) holding that where the defendant was in default the district court correctly accepted the fact allegations of the complaint as true (D) holding once default was determined the court should have accepted as true all of the factual al legations of the complaint except those relating to damages (E) holding that a court need not accept as true conclusory allegations which are contradicted by documents referred to in the complaint
Output (English): holding that a court need not accept as true conclusory allegations which are contradicted by documents referred to in the complaint