UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

 

 ) 

SUSIE M. POINDEXTER, ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff, ) 

 ) 

 v. ) Civil Action No. 09-1392 (RLW) 

 ) 

WACHOVIA MORTGAGE CORPORATION, ) 

et al. ) 

 ) 

 Defendants. ) 

 ) 

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

Presently before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Default Judgment Against 

Defendant Chase Title, Inc., ECF No. 52 [hereinafter Mot.]. In her amended complaint, Plaintiff 

alleges that she was fraudulently induced to refinance her mortgage with a loan that contained 

payment terms she could not meet. See 1st Am. Verified Compl., ECF No. 19. Against Chase 

Title, Inc. (“Chase”), Plaintiff alleges a common-law claim of unconscionability, id. ¶¶ 81–84, 

and a claim for violation of the D.C. Consumer Protection Procedures Act, id. ¶¶ 109–16. 

The U.S. Marshals Service served a copy of the amended complaint on Chase’s 

registered agent, National Registered Agents, in August 2010. Process Receipt and Return, ECF 

No. 33 at 2. Chase answered the amended complaint through counsel in December 2010. See

Ans. of Def., Chase Title, Inc., to 1st Am. Verified Compl., ECF No. 34. In April 2011, Chase’s 

counsel moved to withdraw. See Mot. to Withdraw as Counsel for Def. Chase Title, Inc., 

Pursuant to LCvR 83.6(c), ECF No. 39. On May 31, 2011, the Court granted that motion, which 

was not opposed by any party and which was not responded to by Chase itself, as conceded.

Order, ECF No. 43. At that moment, Chase became unrepresented by counsel. 
2

A corporation may not proceed pro se in a civil action. 28 U.S.C. § 1654; see United

States v. High Country Broadcasting Co., Inc., 3 F.3d 1244 (9th Cir. 1993). The Court warned 

Chase of that fact several times, through several orders sent to several addresses where Chase 

might have been found, giving Chase ample time and opportunity to secure counsel to represent 

it in this case. See Order, ECF No. 43; Order, ECF No. 46. The final deadline by which Chase 

was to have secured counsel was August 29, 2011. Order at 2, ECF No. 46; Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d).

To date, since Chase’s original counsel withdrew, no counsel has entered an appearance in this 

case on behalf of Chase and Chase has not responded in any way to any of the Court’s orders.

By failing to secure counsel, Chase has failed to defend itself in this case. The Clerk of the 

Court therefore properly entered Chase’s default on September 29, 2011. Default, ECF No. 51; 

see Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). 

Plaintiff now moves for judgment on that default and requests an ex parte hearing on 

damages at the time of trial. See Mot. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2), that 

motion will be granted. This default judgment may be amended upon an appropriate showing by 

Plaintiff regarding the amount of damages, whereupon final judgment will be entered. 

Accordingly, it is hereby 

ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Default Judgment Against Defendant 

Chase Title, Inc., ECF No. 52, is GRANTED; and it is 

FURTHER ORDERED that default judgment is entered against Chase Title, Inc. 

SO ORDERED this 8th day of November, 2011. 

ROBERT L. WIKLINS 

United States District Judge 

Judge 

Robert L. 

Wilkins

Digitally signed by Judge Robert L. 

Wilkins 

DN: cn=Judge Robert L. Wilkins, 

o=U.S. District Court, ou=Chambers 

of Honorable Robert L. Wilkins, 

email=RW@dc.uscourt.gov, c=US 

Date: 2011.11.08 11:09:36 -05'00'