Findling v. White Cloud Public School District et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
DARREN FINDLING,
as Next Friend to C.S.,
Plaintiff, 	Hon. Jane M. Beckering
v. 	Case No. 1:24-cv-1018
WHITE CLOUD PUBLIC SCHOOL
DISTRICT, et al.,
Defendants.
____________________________________/
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) for a report and
recommendation 	on 	Plaintiff’s 	Motion 	for 	Default 	Judgment 	against 	Defendant 	George
Lambright. (ECF No. 107.) For the following reasons, I recommend that the Court grant the
motion and enter the requested default judgment.
Plaintiff initiated this action on September 30, 2024, against Defendant Lambright, who
is currently incarcerated with the Michigan Department of Corrections (MDOC), and others
alleging that Defendant Lambright sexually assaulted Plaintiff’s minor, C.S., while Defendant
Lambright served as C.S.’s special education teacher at Defendant White Cloud Public Schools.
A default pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) was entered against Defendant
Lambright on December 16, 2024, after he failed to plead or otherwise defend. (ECF No. 16.)
Pursuant to a Stipulated Order for Dismissal (ECF No. 102) entered on December 11, 2025, all
Defendants other than Defendant Lambright have been dismissed from the action.
Case 1:24-cv-01018-JMB-SJB ECF No. 117, PageID.<pageID> Filed 01/30/26 Page
1 of 5

2
To obtain a default judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2), a plaintiff
must show, among other things, that the defendant was properly served with process, and the
procedural obligations for a default judgment under Rule 55 have been fulfilled. 1 Engelke v.
Accounts Research, Inc., No. 2:18-cv-42, 2019 WL 7340130, at *1 (E.D. Tenn. Nov. 14, 2019),
report and recommendation adopted, 2020 WL 9934399 (E.D. Tenn. Jan. 3, 2020) (citing HICA
Educ. Loan Corp. v. Klugewicz, No. 1:11-cv-287, 2012 WL 6799752, at *3-4 (E.D. Tenn. Apr.
17, 2012) (citations omitted)). Defendant Lambright was personally served with the summons
and complaint on October 8, 2024. (ECF No. 11.) Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
55, a party must follow a two-step process to obtain a default judgment. As required by Rule
55(a), a party seeking a default judgment must obtain entry of a default by the clerk of the court.
Then, pursuant to Rule 55(b), the moving party may seek entry of a judgment on the default
under either subdivision (b)(1) or (b)(2). A default having previously been entered against
Defendant Lambright, Plaintiff requests a default judgment pursuant to Rule 55(b)(2).
Upon entry of a default under Rule 55(a), all the well-pled allegations of the plaintiff’s
complaint are deemed to be admitted. Ford Motor Co. v. Cross, 441 F. Supp. 2d 837, 846 (E.D.
Mich. 2006); accord Malibu Media, LLC v. Schelling, 31 F. Supp. 3d 910, 911 (E.D. Mich.
2014) (“The entry of default conclusively establishes every factual predicate of a claim for
relief.”) (citing Thomas v. Miller, 489 F.3d 293, 299 (6th Cir. 2007)); and O’Neal v. Nationstar
Mortg., No. 1:07CV505, 2009 WL 1795305, at *3 (S.D. Ohio June 23, 2009) (“Once the default
has been entered, the well-pleaded facts of the complaint relating to liability must be accepted as
true.”). In other words, “[t]he effect of a default judgment is that the defendant admits the
1 Having confirmed by the MDOC’s publicly-available records that Defendant Lambright is
currently incarcerated at the Central Michigan Correctional Facility, I find that Plaintiff is
excused from compliance with the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act’s affidavit requirement for
obtaining a default judgment. See 50 U.S.C. § 3931.
Case 1:24-cv-01018-JMB-SJB ECF No. 117, PageID.<pageID> Filed 01/30/26 Page
2 of 5

3
plaintiff’s well-pleaded allegations of fact, is concluded on those facts by the judgment, and is
barred from contesting on appeal the facts thus established.” Atlantic Recording Corp. v.
Sandridge, No. 1:07 CV 3764, 2008 WL 11377734, at *1 (N.D. Ohio, Mar. 28, 2008) (citation
omitted).
“A default judgment on well-pleaded allegations establishes only defendant’s liability;
plaintiff must still establish the extent of damages.” Kelley v. Carr, 567 F. Supp. 831, 841 (W.D.
Mich. 1983). Hence, when moving for a default judgment, the plaintiff must prove his
entitlement to the amount of monetary damages requested; a court will not simply accept a
plaintiff’s statement of damages. See Malibu Media, LLC, 31 F. Supp. 3d at 911 (“But the Court
is not free to enter judgment in the amount requested by the plaintiff.”). Rather, “[t]he Court
must conduct an inquiry to ascertain the amount of damages with reasonable certainty.” Priority
Insulation v. Triple Crown Fin. Grp., Inc., No. 1:05CV563, 2006 WL 1529330, at *3 (S.D. Ohio
June 5, 2006) (citing Antoine v. Atlas Turner, Inc., 66 F.3d 105, 111 (6th Cir. 1995)).
Although Rule 55(b) authorizes the court to “conduct hearings or make referrals” in order
“to determine the amount of damages[,] establish the truth of any allegation by evidence[,] or
investigate any other matter,” Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2)(B), a court may also rely on affidavits and
other documentary evidence in lieu of a hearing to determine the appropriate amount of
damages. See Hart v. Estes, No. 3:17CV-317, 2018 WL 1914295, at *2 (W.D. Ky. Apr. 23,
2018) (“The court, in its discretion, need not hold a hearing on the motion, but may determine on
the filings that default judgment on the claims is proper, and may fix damages where the plaintiff
has provided sufficient documentary proof to establish the judgment amount.”) (citation
omitted); see also Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. RPM Mgmt. Co., No. 2:11-cv-377, 2011 WL
5389425, at *1 (S.D. Ohio Nov. 7, 2011) (“Although the court may conduct an evidentiary
Case 1:24-cv-01018-JMB-SJB ECF No. 117, PageID.<pageID> Filed 01/30/26 Page
3 of 5

4
hearing to determine damages, an evidentiary hearing is not a prerequisite to the entry of default
judgment if damages are contained in documentary evidence or detailed affidavits and can be
ascertained on the record before the court.”) (citing J & J Sports Prod., Inc. v. Lukes, No. 1:10
CV 535, 2010 WL 4105663, at *1 (N.D. Ohio Oct. 18, 2010)).
Here, Plaintiff seeks a default judgment in the amount of $4.5 million. (ECF No. 107 at
PageID.1022.) Plaintiff states that future medical costs resulting from the trauma of the assaults
and abuse represent one component of the requested damage award. Plaintiff states that the
anticipated future medical expenses total $546,507.50, and he supports this figure with a report
prepared by Dr. Catherine Doty on March 31, 2025. (ECF No. 107-3.) A second component is
damages for lost future wages based on his diminished capacity to maintain employment as a
result of Defendant Lambright’s sexual abuse. This amount, $1,342,244.80, is calculated based
on the State of Michigan’s current minimum wage of $13.73 per hour and Dr. Doty’s calculated
life expectancy for C.S. (Id. at PageID.1093–94.) While Plaintiff does not identify the basis for
the balance of $2,611.247.70 of the requested $4.5 million damage award, it is reasonable to
assume that it accounts for non-economic damages, such as pain and suffering, humiliation,
emotional distress, and the like. Based on the supporting exhibits, including C.S.’s deposition
testimony, as well as the gravity of the harm to C.S. resulting from Defendant Lambright’s
actions, I find that this amount is a reasonable approximation of C.S.’s non-economic damages.
Accordingly, I recommend that Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment in the amount of
$4.5 million be granted.
Dated: January 30, 2026 	/s/ Sally J. Berens
SALLY J. BERENS
U.S. Magistrate Judge
Case 1:24-cv-01018-JMB-SJB ECF No. 117, PageID.<pageID> Filed 01/30/26 Page
4 of 5

5
NOTICE TO PARTIES
OBJECTIONS to this Report and Recommendation must be filed with the Clerk of Court
within 14 days of the date of service of this notice. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). Failure to file
objections within the specified time waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order. See
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
Case 1:24-cv-01018-JMB-SJB ECF No. 117, PageID.<pageID> Filed 01/30/26 Page
5 of 5