United States District Court, W.D. Missouri, Western Division
FIRST BUSINESS BANK, SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO ALTERRA BANK; Plaintiff,
ALBERT JACK CHALMERS JR., Defendant.
ROSEANN A. KETCHMARK, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment
(doc. 10). Upon review of the record, the Complaint, and
motion for default, the Court GRANTS
Plaintiff's Motion as follows:
Plaintiff filed this action on October 11, 2017.
Plaintiff is a resident of Wisconsin with its principal place
of business in Overland Park, Kansas.
Defendant is a natural person and resides in Kansas City,
the Complaint, Plaintiff alleges Chalmers Automotive, LLC,
(the “Borrower”) executed a Promissory Note in
favor of the Plaintiff evidencing a loan made by the
Plaintiff to the Borrower in the aggregate principal amount
of $830, 000.00 (the “Note”).
Defendant personally guaranteed the loan Plaintiff made to
the Borrower. (Doc. 1, Exhibit B.)
July 19, 2017, the Borrower filed a petition for bankruptcy
relief in the Western District of Missouri Bankruptcy Court,
case no. 17-41924. This action constitutes a default under
the terms of the Note and Loan Agreement.
Under the terms of the Note and Loan Agreement, upon the
occurrence of a default, all outstanding principal, accrued
interest, and other sums due under the Note and Loan
Agreement shall become immediately due and payable to
Plaintiff is seeking a judgment for monetary damages against
Defendant for a default under his personal guarantee.
After an extension of the original service deadline, on
January 30, 2018, Plaintiff filed a return of service with
the Court. The return of service stated Defendant was
properly served with the Summons and Complaint pursuant to
Rule 4(h) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on January
4, 2018. Defendant was served at the following address: 1420
Gentry Street, Kansas City, Missouri, 64116.
Court finds service was proper because the Defendant was
served with a copy of the summons and complaint within the
time allowed by Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. The service was provided by an individual who was
greater than eighteen years of age and who is not a party to
February 5, 2018, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause as
to why the case should not be dismissed for failure to
prosecute. (Doc. 7.)
February 5, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion for entry of
default for Defendant's failure to timely answer or