Ignoring one’s problems in hopes that they will go away is never a winning strategy. It doesn’t work. An Eagle’s local in Iowa found that out the hard way. By not responding to a civil lawsuit filed against them, they did not stop the court from entering a judgment. Some nine months later, the local was forced to close.
Details of the Case
Eagles #2675 was sued by a former employee who alleged violations of federal laws designed to protect the rights of pregnant women and new mothers. Apparently, the former employee was expecting federally mandated accommodations when she was ready to return to work after giving birth. She alleged in her suit that the Eagles failed to make those accommodations. Ultimately, she never returned to work.
The lawsuit was filed on June 26, 2024. Eagles #2675 was given until July 17 to respond to the suit. They did not do so. Nonetheless, the court proceeded with the case and heard the plaintiff’s arguments. With no one in court to defend the Eagles, judge Crystal Cronk was left with no other option but to find in favor of the plaintiff. She was awarded a default judgment in excess of $307K plus interest.
An additional $13,608.92 was awarded the following week to cover the plaintiff’s legal expenses. So now Eagles #2675 is on the hook for more than $313K. That’s why the local closed. They do not have the financial resources to pay. As for why they failed to respond, local representatives say the organization did not have resources to pay an attorney. They were unable to find an attorney willing to represent them.
Not Allowed to Represent Themselves
Matters were made worse for Eagles #2675 by the fact that state law prohibits non-profit organizations from representing themselves in civil court. Had they been allowed to do so, they could have sent one of the local officers to the court in defense of the organization. But with that option unavailable and no attorney willing to represent them, what else were they to do?
It seems like both sides have legitimate complaints here. If the plaintiff’s contentions are accurate, Eagles #2675 failed to meet the requirements of federal and state law. Likewise, the organization was not afforded the opportunity for self-representation under a system that would force them to hire an attorney despite not being able to pay for services.
Default Judgments Are a Reality
Regardless of the circumstances in the Iowa case, default judgments are a reality. Once a civil lawsuit has been filed and served to a defendant, a process demanding some sort of legal outcome is put in motion. The case is going to be settled one way or another. So failing to respond or not showing up in court really is not a viable option.
For the plaintiff, a default judgment can be small consolation. Why? Because a defendant unable or unwilling to participate in the legal process is probably going to be difficult to collect from. An organization can bring in a collection agency, like Utah-based Judgment Collectors, but an uncooperative debtor is still uncooperative.
From the defendant’s point of view, failing to respond or appear in court may seem like the best option. But it is not. It doesn’t change anything. Allowing a default judgment simply bolsters the case against the defendant.
If you were ever served with a civil lawsuit, do whatever you have to do to respond. Then show up in court on the trial date. Otherwise, a default judgment is likely going to be filed against you.
