Meade Communities, LLC v. Mikami

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
MEADE COMMUNITIES, LLC, *
Plaintiff, *
v. * Civil Case No. 1:26-cv-2397-JRR
SUSAN M. MIKAMI, *
Defendant. *
*
* * * * * * *
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT
This Report and Recommendation addresses the Motion for Default Judgment (“Motion”)
filed by Plaintiff, Meade Communities, LLC, against Defendant Susan M. Mikami (“Defendant”).
(ECF No. 8). Defendant has not filed a response, and the time for doing so has passed. See Loc.
R. 105.2.a. (D. Md. 2025). On September 25, 2026, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local
Rules 301 and 302, Judge Rubin referred this case to me for a report and recommendation on
Plaintiff’s Motion. (ECF No. 9). I find that a hearing is unnecessary. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2);
Loc. R. 105.6 (D. Md. 2025). For the reasons set forth below, I respectfully recommend that
Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment be GRANTED.
I. BACKGROUND
On June 16, 2026, Plaintiff brought the instant lawsuit against Defendant alleging breach
of contract. (ECF No. 1). “Plaintiff owns and operates family housing located on Fort Meade,
Maryland under the Department of Defense Military Housing Privatization Initiative.” Id. at 1.
Defendant, a civilian, executed a tenant lease agreement on September 14, 2023. Id. at 2. In
particular, Defendant leased the property at 2960 2nd Army Avenue, #2960D, Fort Meade, MD
Case 1:26-cv-02397-JRR Document 10 Filed 10/08/26 Page 1 of 6

2
20755. Id. The Lease provided that on the first day of each month of the Term, Defendant was
required to pay rent in the amount of $2,425.00. (ECF No. 1-1 at 1). Under the lease, “if the owner
fails to receive Resident’s Monthly Rent payment on or before the close of business on the fifth
day of the month in which it is due, a Late Charge in the amount set forth in Section 1 will be paid
by Resident and collectible by Owner as Additional Rent for each month the Monthly Rent
payment is overdue ....” Id. at 2. In accordance with this provision, the Lease specified that Plaintiff
could impose a late charge of “five percent (5%) of the Monthly rent.” Id. at 1. Furthermore, any
failure by Defendant to pay rent as required, could “at Owner’s election, cause all Monthly Rent
for the Term to be immediately due and payable.” Id. at 2.
According to Plaintiff, Defendant failed to pay rent in a timely manner on multiple
occasions, and Plaintiff sent Defendant Notices of Unpaid Rent and Balance Due Statements. See
(ECF No. 1-2). Defendant’s lease ended on September 14, 2024, but since then she has “been a
tenant holding over, paying rent sporadically on a month-to-month basis.” (ECF No. 1 at 3.)
Plaintiff sent Defendant a Notice to Vacate the premises on May 11, 2026. See (ECF No. 1-3).
Service of process was effectuated on July 6, 2026. (ECF No 4). Defendant did not file an
answer or responsive pleading within the requisite time period. Upon Plaintiff’s Motion for Entry
of Default against Defendant, the Clerk entered judgment in their favor on July 29, 2026. (ECF
Nos. 6, 7). Plaintiff filed their Motion for Default Judgment on September 8, 2026, seeking an
order of eviction and monetary judgment of $9,219.50. (ECF No. 8).
II. LEGAL ANALYIS
A. Standard for Entry of Default Judgment
Case 1:26-cv-02397-JRR Document 10 Filed 10/08/26 Page 2 of 6

3
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 governs entries of default and default judgments. Rule
55(a) requires that “[w]hen a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has
failed to plead or otherwise defend, and that failure is shown by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk
must enter the party’s default.” Where a plaintiff’s claim is not a “sum certain” or a “sum that can
be made certain by computation,” the plaintiff “must apply to the court for default judgment” under
Rule 55(b)(2).
In determining whether to award a default judgment, the Court accepts as true the well
pleaded factual allegations in the Complaint as to liability. Entrepreneur Media, Inc. v. JMD
Entm’t Grp., LLC, 958 F. Supp. 2d 588, 593 (D. Md. 2013) (citing Ryan v. Homecomings Fin.
Network, 253 F.3d 778, 780 (4th Cir. 2001)). Nonetheless, the Court must consider whether the
unchallenged facts constitute a legitimate cause of action because a party in default does not admit
mere conclusions of law. United States v. Redden, No. 09-cv-2688-WDQ, 2010 WL 2651607, at
*2 (D. Md. June 30, 2012) (citing Ryan, 253 F.3d at 790). Although the Fourth Circuit has a “strong
policy that cases be decided on the merits,” United States v. Shaffer Equip. Co., 11 F.3d 450, 453
(4th Cir. 1993), default judgment “is appropriate when the adversary process has been halted
because of an essentially unresponsive party.” S.E.C. v. Lawbaugh, 359 F. Supp. 2d 418, 421 (D.
Md. 2005).
If the Court determines that liability is established, the Court must then determine the
appropriate amount of damages or other relief. CGI Fin., Inc., v. Johnson, No. 12-cv-1985-ELH,
2013 WL 1192353, at *1 (D. Md. Mar. 21, 2013). In this regard, “[a] default judgment must not
differ in kind from, or exceed in amount, what is demanded in the pleadings.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(c).
The Court does not accept factual allegations regarding damages as true but rather must make an
independent determination regarding such allegations. Entrepreneur Media, Inc., 958 F. Supp. 2d
Case 1:26-cv-02397-JRR Document 10 Filed 10/08/26 Page 3 of 6

4
at 593. A plaintiff’s assertion of a sum in a complaint does not make the sum “certain” unless the
plaintiff claims liquidated damages; otherwise, the complaint must be supported by affidavit or
documentary evidence. Redden, 2010 WL 2651607, at *2. Rule 55(b)(2) provides that “the court
may conduct hearings or make referrals . . . when, to enter or effectuate judgment, it needs
to . . . determine the amount of damages.” The Court is not required to conduct an evidentiary
hearing to determine damages; it may rely on affidavits or documentary evidence in the record to
determine the appropriate sum. See, e.g., Mongue v. Portofino Ristorante, 751 F. Supp. 2d 789,
795 (D. Md. 2010) (collecting cases).
B. Liability
As noted, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant has failed to pay rent in a timely manner. Plaintiff
seeks an order of eviction and a monetary judgment for back rent and attorney’s fees and costs.
Defendant received the Complaint on June 16, 2026, the Clerk entered default on July 29, 2026,
and Defendant failed to respond or enter an appearance. Accordingly, all of Plaintiff’s allegations
other than those pertaining to damages are deemed admitted. Fed R. Civ. P. 8(b)(6); see Ryan, 253
F.3d at 780. It is within the Court’s discretion to grant default judgment when a defendant is
unresponsive. More than two months have passed since Defendant received the Complaint, yet she
has not responded. Thus, if Plaintiff has established Defendant’s liability, the Court should grant
default judgment.
With regard to liability, Plaintiff indicated in its Complaint that it claims breach of contract.
(ECF No. 1 at 2-3). A breach of contract is “‘a failure without legal excuse to perform any promise
which forms the whole or part of a contract…’” In re Ashby Enters., Ltd., 250 B.R. 69, 72 (Bankr.
D. Md. 2000) (quoting Connecticut Pizza, Inc. v. Bell Atlantic-Washington, D.C., Inc., 193 B.R.
217, 225 (Bankr. D. Md. 1996)) (citation omitted). Plaintiff’s allegations are supported by copies
Case 1:26-cv-02397-JRR Document 10 Filed 10/08/26 Page 4 of 6

5
of the Lease (ECF No. 1-1), as well as the Ledger (ECF No. 1-2), which documents Defendant’s
failure to pay rent as required by the Lease. Therefore, based on the evidence submitted, Defendant
breached the contract and is liable to Plaintiff. Since liability exists, a default judgment is proper.
C. Damages
Having determined that Plaintiff has established liability, it is now appropriate to determine
damages. Plaintiff claims a total of $9,219.50 in damages in its Complaint and its Motion. See
(ECF Nos. 1, 8). Plaintiff submitted Defendant’s “tenant ledger” which supports the $8,614.50 of
back rent and late fees owed. (ECF No. 8-4). Plaintiff also seeks costs in the amount of $605.00.
According to 28 U.S.C. §1924, “[b]efore any bill of costs is taxed, the party claiming any item of
cost or disbursement shall attach thereto an affidavit, made by himself or by his duly authorized
attorney or agent having knowledge of the facts, that such item is correct and has been necessarily
incurred in the case and that the services for which fees have been charged were actually and
necessarily performed.”
Additionally, Local Rule 109.1(b) provides that, “in any case where any costs other than
the fee for filing the action are being requested, the bill of costs shall be supported by affidavit and
accompanied by a memorandum setting forth the grounds and authorities supporting the request.
Any vouchers or bills supporting the cost being requested shall be attached as exhibits.”
The affidavit, of Christie Taylor, the Community Manager, is the only documentation
provided to support Plaintiff’s request. (ECF No. 8-2). The affidavit merely states that Plaintiff is
entitled to expenses (process server and filing fee); “it does not break down that sum into its
component parts.” Meade Communities, LLC v. Jones, No. 21-cv-1976-ELH, 2022 WL 2869159
at *8 (D. Md. July 21, 2022). Nonetheless, Plaintiff’s request is supported by the record. The
Case 1:26-cv-02397-JRR Document 10 Filed 10/08/26 Page 5 of 6

6
Docket indicates that Plaintiff paid a filing fee of $405, “which is recoverable under 28 U.S.C.
§1920(1).” Id.; see Fed. R. Evid. 201. Concerning the process server fee, the Proof of Service,
shows that the process server charged Plaintiff $200.00 to effectuate service. See (ECF No. 4).
Because Plaintiff presents sufficient evidence to support the amount of damages claimed, I
recommend that the Court award $9,219.50 in damages and issue an order of eviction.
III. CONCLUSION
In sum, I recommend that:
1. The Court grants Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment (ECF No. 8) against
Defendant Susan M. Mikami;
2. The Court awards Plaintiff damages in the amount of $9,219.50;
3. I also direct the Clerk to mail a copy of this Report and Recommendation to Defendant
at the address listed on Plaintiff’s Complaint. (ECF No. 1). Any objections to this
Report and Recommendation must be served and filed within fourteen (14) days,
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) and Local Rule 301.5.b.
October 8, 2026 /s/
Date J. Mark Coulson
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 1:26-cv-02397-JRR Document 10 Filed 10/08/26 Page 6 of 6