IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 


FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLV ANIA 


KELLY TROY COOLEY, ) 


) 


Plaintiff, ) 


) 

v. ) C.A. 07-208 Erie 

) 

ERIE COUNTY SHERIFF ROBERT ) 

MERSKI, et al., ) 

) 

Defendants. ) 

MEMORANDUM ORDER 

Plaintiff Kelly Troy Cooley has filed an appeal (Doc. 124) from magistrate judge's order 

dated February 12,2010, in which she denied his Motion for Default Judgment and Sanctions 

(Doc. 121). The Federal Magistrates Act provides two separate standards ofjudicial review: 

(1) "de novo" for magistrate resolution ofdispositive matters, see 28 U.S .C. § 636(b)(1 )(B)-(C), 

and (2) "clearly erroneous or contrary to law" for magistrate resolution of nondispositive matters. 

See 28 U.S.c. § 636(b)(1)(A); 

Mr. Cooley alleges that his constitutional rights were violated during and after a criminal 

sentencing in the Court of Common Pleas of Erie County; that he was injured by excessive force 

when he was removed from the courthouse; that he was subject to racial slurs; that he was denied 

medical treatment by the Erie County Prison; and finally, that he was wrongly denied a request to 

press criminal charges against the sheriffs involved in the incident. 

Mr. Cooley requests that default judgment be entered on the grounds that the defendants' 

1 


Case 1:07-cv-00208-MBC Document 130 Filed 05/06/10 Page 1 of 3
prior counsel, Matthew McLaughlin, Esq., who has since been replaced by Patrick M. Carey, 

Esq., "clearly violated the Federal Rules ofEvidence by tampering and altering incident reports 

and CD-R disk, which were to be the defendants only evidence used in this civil matter." Appeal 

Motion (Doc. 124) at 2. Mr. Cooley requests that we "grant default judgment against the 

defendants in the amount of 11 million dollars, fees and costs, and to pay plaintiff for all 

expenses used in this case." Appeal Motion (Doc. 124) at 7. 

Defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment, which is currently pending before 

the magistrate judge. We make no finding or ruling on that motion at this time. We note for the 

sake of clarification that rather than filing a responsive brief, as required by the magistrate 

judge's scheduling order, plaintiff filed a document entitled "Plaintiff Rest on Claims Established 

in All Petitions Requesting Judgment by Default" (Doc. 127), in which he avers that "[a]ll 

evidence provided by (new) counsel for the defendants is evidence that was never provided by 

Attorney Matthew J. McLaughlin, since the year 2007 .... [F]or the defendants to now appoint 

an attorney who they expect will cover-up the discovery violations of prior counsel only 

established plaintiffs claims for discovery violations; and the entry ofjUdgment by the 

defendants." 

We find that the defendants have not failed to answer discovery and are not in violation 

of any deadlines imposed by the Court. The magistrate judge correctly entered an order (textonly entry) dated February 12,2010 denying the motion for default and sanctions on the grounds 

that "Defendants have met all response deadlines." She entered a subsequent text-only order 

dated February 22, 2010 which states that "[i]f deemed necessary, Plaintiff will be given the 

opportunity to review, in advance and in camera, any CD-R or other video disc that Defendants 

2 


Case 1:07-cv-00208-MBC Document 130 Filed 05/06/10 Page 2 of 3
wish to place in evidence at trial." 

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2), the court may enter judgment by default when a 

party has failed to plead or otherwise defend in the action. The entry of a default judgment is an 

extreme sanction and the authority to do so is entrusted to the discretion ofthe trial court. 

Hoxworth v. Blinder. Robinson & Co.. Inc., 980 F.2d 912, 919 (3d Cir.1992); Poulis v. State 

Farm and Casualty Co., 747 F.2d 863, 868 (3d Cir.l984). The court must be satisfied that the 

non-moving party has received notice ofthe motion and that the judgment and remedies applied 

for are justified by the pleadings and other information of record. We have carefully reviewed the 

magistrate judge's orders and the parties submissions, and find insufficient evidence that default 

judgment should be entered in this case. Mr. Cooley has been provided with access to 

appropriate materials and defendants have disclosed their evidence in a timely fashion. 

tZ:­

AND NOW, this day of May, 2010, the Court having considered Plaintiffs appeal 

(Doc. 124) of Magistrate Judge Susan Paradise Baxter's order denying Plaintiffs Motion for 

Default Judgment and Sanctions (Doc. 121), it is HEREBY ORDERED that said order is 

AFFIRMED. 

~l~~fk=· Maurice B. Cohill, Jr. 


Senior United States District Court Judge 


cc: 	 Kelley Troy Cooley 

Patrick M. Carey, Esq. 

3 


Case 1:07-cv-00208-MBC Document 130 Filed 05/06/10 Page 3 of 3