Opinion
CIVIL JKB-23-0342
11-14-2023
SHAUNTAY PARRISH, Plaintiff, v. EGYPT LEITHMAN, et aL, Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
James K. Bredar, Chief Judge
Plaintiff Shauntay Parrish filed a Complaint against Defendants Egypt Leithman and DCN Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Accounts Receivable (“DCN”). (ECFNo. 1.) Leithman is proceeding pro se and a default has been entered against DCN. The Court previously issued an Order directing Panish to show cause why her service to DCN should not be quashed, given that the summons and complaint were mailed to an incorrect address for DCN. (ECF No. 16.) Parrish responds that “[t]he Court rightly noted that' the address that DCN currently has registered with the state of Florida is different that the address that the Plaintiff served” but that “the discrepancy is because DCN Holdings, Inc. changed its address with the state after the Plaintiff served it.” (ECF No. 17.) Parrish indicates that she served DCN “several weeks” prior to its address change. (Id.)
The Court appreciates that Panish apparently served DCN at the conect address, but given the preference to “resolve cases on the merits [and] to avoid procedural defaults whenever possible,” Lee v. Hagerstown Goodwill, Indus., Inc., No. CV RDB-16-1364, 2017 WL 1364755, at *2 (D. Md. Apr. 14, 2017), the Court will direct Panish to serve DCN at its new address.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: -
1. Parrish is DIRECTED to serve DCN Holdings, Inc., d/b/a Accounts Receivable with the summons and complaint at its updated address within 30 days of this Order; and
2. DCN is DIRECTED to file its answer or other responsive pleading within 21 days of being served.