Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-2_05-cv-02092/USCOURTS-arwd-2_05-cv-02092-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:2201 Declaratory Judgment

---

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

FORT SMITH DIVISION

PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE CO. PLAINTIFF

v. Case No. 05-2092

RUSSELL LAYTON;

PUCKETT MACHINERY COMPANY;

WEDLAKE FABRICATING, INC.;

J&R ESCORT SERVICE, L.L.C.; and

FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY DEFENDANTS

ORDER

Now on the 23rd day of May, 2006, comes on for consideration

plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment Against Wedlake

Fabricating, Inc. (doc. 35). The Court, being well and

sufficiently advised, finds and orders as follows with respect

thereto: 

1. The plaintiff, Progressive Casualty Insurance Co.

(“Progressive”), originally filed this action on June 20, 2005

against defendants Russell Layton and Pacesetter Trucking

Company, Inc. An Amended Complaint (doc. #25) was filed on

February 22, 2006 naming as defendants Layton, Puckett Machinery

Company, Wedlake Fabricating, Inc. (“Wedlake”), J&R Escort

Service, L.L.C., and Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company. The

Case 2:05-cv-02092-JLH Document 51 Filed 05/23/06 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>
2

Amended Complaint seeks a declaratory judgment as to whether

Progressive’s insurance policy, issued to Russell Layton, covers

an accident involving Layton and claims make by Layton, Puckett

Machinery Company, Wedlake Fabricating, Inc., J&R Escort Service,

L.L.C. and Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company with respect to that

accident. 

2. As evidenced by an Affidavit of Service (doc. # 32)

filed with this Court on March 16, 2006, Wedlake was served with

the Amended Complaint on March 6, 2006. 

3. Wedlake has failed to answer or otherwise respond to

Progressive’s complaint. 

4. A Notice of Default Procedures (doc. #36) against

Wedlake was entered by the Clerk of the Court on April 21, 2006;

and, following entry of an Affidavit in Support of Default (doc.

#37), Default (doc. #38) was entered against Wedlake on April 28,

2006. 

5. Progressive now moves for default judgment against

Wedlake. 

6. Due to Wedlake’s failure to respond, it is in default

pursuant to Rule 55 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Therefore, Progressive’s motion should be granted and judgment

should be, and hereby is, entered against Wedlake, and in favor

Case 2:05-cv-02092-JLH Document 51 Filed 05/23/06 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>
3

of Progressive, finding no coverage under the Progressive policy

for any claims made by Wedlake, or any of its agents or assigns. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Jimm Larry Hendren

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:05-cv-02092-JLH Document 51 Filed 05/23/06 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: <pageID>