UNITED STAT ES DIS TRICT COURT F OR THE DIS TRICT OF COLUM BIA
ABDOULAYE TALL, P laintif f,
v. Civil Action No. 09-2196 (JD B) COMCAST OF P OTOMAC, LLC, et al., Defendan ts.
MEMORAN DUM The Clerk of

Court has enter ed def

ault ag ainst the Credit Protection Association (" CPA"). See Clerk' s Entry

of De fault [Docket Entry 17]. Befor e the Court is [Docket Entry 22] Abdoulaye Ta ll's motion for a defa ult judgment. Upon e ntry of def ault, "the defa

ulting def endant is deemed to a dmit every

well-plea ded alleg ation in the complaint." Int'l Painter s & A llied Trade s Indus. Pension Fund v. R.W. Amrine Dry wall Co., Inc. , 239 F. Supp. 2d 26, 30 (D.D .C. 2002). " Although the defa ult establishes a def

endant' s liabilit y , the cour t is required to make an independe nt determination of the sum to be a war ded unless the a

mount of damag es is cer

tain." I d. Henc e, whe n seekinga def ault judgme nt, the plaintiff must prove its entitlement to the damag es or other

relief reque sted. See id. "I

n rulingon such a motion, the cour t may rely on detailed a ffidavits or doc umentary evidenc e to deter

mine the appr opriate sum for the def ault judgme nt." I d. By order issued on August 20, 2010, the Court require d Tall to provide by aff idavit sufficie nt evidence to enable the Court to assess and orde r appr opriate r elief. H e has r esponded to that order by

a leng thy memorandum with attac hments rather than through an af

fidavit asinstructed. None theless, the Court will enter a defa ult judgment on the ba sis of the law a nd the materia l Tall as provided. In his Memorandum Reg ardingEntitlement to Damag es (" Damag es Mem." ), Tall see ks actua l damag es, statutory damag es, cour

t costs, attorney ' s fee s and punitive damag es on his claims under the Fa ir Credit ReportingAct (F CRA) and the F air De bt Coll ection Prac tices Ac t (F DCPA), and for

defa mation. He has pr ovided no documentation or other justification for a ny attorney ' s fee s (mere ly

claimingthat he incur

red $1500 in leg al expenses) -- which stands to
rea son since he ha s proce eded pr o se in this action. Henc e, no attorne y ' s fee s will be awa rded. The only court c osts relatingto this action specified by Tall is the filing f

ee of $350, to which he is entitled. Tall' s submissi on is not of much help in specify ing a ny rec overa ble ac tual damag es. He makes g ener al, conc lusory asser tions with respect to his time and ef fort spent de alingwith this matter, his difficulty

in ge tting one loa

n, and the a

nguish and pain he ha s suffer ed. B ut he has provided no de tail as to any injury , and no ac count for the Court to quantify any damag es. Armed only

with his broad, conc lusory claims, the Court is hard pre ssed to make a specific deter mination of an amount to which Ta ll is entit led. And Ta ll has provided little support for a claim of a willful violation by

CPA -- indeed, he simply assumes either

that CPA's conduc t must have be en willful or that the de fault dee ms a willful violation to be admitted. 1 The Court ca nnot conclude , there fore , that willfulness under the r eleva nt statutes is well-pled and he nce de emed admitted by

virtue of the de fault.

1 Tall has not satisfied the r equire ments and standar d for a n awa rd of punitive dama g es and under the circ umstances he re he is not entitl ed to any
. -2-I t is fair to say , howeve r, that this was not a major statutory violation or defamation of Tall. The c ircumstance s here amount to no more than wha t one would expect from this ty pe of fairly routine cr edit dispute and collec tion error . Tall identifies little in the way of conse quence s to him before the matter wa s resolved, a nd the bill in dis pute was quite small. Af ter c onsidering Tall' s damag es submission, the releva nt law and the e ntire re cord, the Court makes an independe nt determination that, whe ther a s actua l damag es for the var ious claims asserte d or as statutory damag es for

a willful violation of the FCRA and the FDCPA (or a combination of both), the prope r dama g es aw ard is $350 in cour t costs and $1500 in additional damag es. Acc ording ly , a def

ault judgme nt in the total amount of $1850 will be entere d.

/s/ J OHN D. B ATES United States District J udg e Date: October

29, 2010

-3-