Changeflow GovPing Courts & Legal ICEE Co v. Brantley Default Judgment Order Dead...
Routine Enforcement Added Final

ICEE Co v. Brantley Default Judgment Order Deadline May 1 2026

Favicon for www.courtlistener.com US District Court WDLA Docket Feed
Filed
Detected
Email

Summary

The US District Court for the Western District of Louisiana issued a memorandum order in ICEE Co et al v. Jeff Brantley (Civil Action No. 25-cv-008) on March 31, 2026. The court directed plaintiffs, who obtained entry of default, to file a Motion for Default Judgment by May 1, 2026. The motion must be supported by affidavits and documentation proving the validity of service, defendant's liability, and any damages sought. Plaintiffs were warned that failure to comply may result in dismissal for failure to prosecute.

“Plaintiffs are now directed to file, by May 1, 2026, a Motion for Default Judgment that is fully supported by affidavits, documentation or other evidence sufficient to prove the validity of service of process, the liability of the defendant, and the amount of any damages sought.”

WDLA , verbatim from source
Published by WDLA on courtlistener.com . Detected, standardized, and enriched by GovPing. Review our methodology and editorial standards .

About this source

GovPing monitors US District Court WDLA Docket Feed for new courts & legal regulatory changes. Every update since tracking began is archived, classified, and available as free RSS or email alerts — 5 changes logged to date.

What changed

The court issued a memorandum order requiring plaintiffs ICEE Co et al to file a Motion for Default Judgment by May 1, 2026. The motion must include affidavits and documentation sufficient to establish validity of service of process, liability of defendant Jeff Brantley, and the amount of damages sought. The order references Crain v. E&M Operating (W.D. La. 2019) and Leedo Cabinetry v. James Sales & Distribution (5th Cir. 1998) for guidance on evidentiary hearing requirements. Plaintiffs who fail to meet the deadline risk dismissal of the civil action for failure to prosecute.

Parties involved in similar dormant litigation should ensure compliance with court-directed deadlines and maintain active case status to avoid dismissal. This order underscores the importance of timely prosecution following default judgment entry.

Archived snapshot

Apr 24, 2026

GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.

Jump To

Top Caption Trial Court Document The text of this document was obtained by analyzing a scanned document and may have typos.

Support FLP

CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project
, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.

Please become a member today.

Join Free.law Now

March 31, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note

ICEE CO ET AL v. JEFF BRANTLEY

District Court, W.D. Louisiana

Trial Court Document

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
SHREVEPORT DIVISION
ICEE CO ET AL CIVIL ACTION NO. 25-cv-008
VERSUS JUDGE VAN HOOK
JEFF BRANTLEY MAGISTRATE JUDGE HORNSBY
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Plaintiffs have obtained entry of default, but the case has sat dormant for several
months. Plaintiffs are now directed to file, by May 1, 2026, a Motion for Default Judgment
that is fully supported by affidavits, documentation or other evidence sufficient to prove
the validity of service of process, the liability of the defendant, and the amount of any
damages sought. If this case has been resolved, Plaintiffs should file a stipulation of or
motion for voluntary dismissal.
Many of the rules relevant to motions for default judgments can be found in Crain
v. E&M Operating, L.L.C., No. 18-CV-00548, 2019 WL 6770732 (W.D. La. 2019). The
motion must be supported by a memorandum that explains the legal basis for liability and
damages or other relief sought, and that states whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary
under the rules explained in Crain and Leedo Cabinetry v. James Sales & Distribution, Inc., 157 F.3d 410, 414 (Sth Cir. 1998). The motion must be accompanied by a proposed
judgment. If Plaintiffs fail to take the steps required by this order, this civil action may be
dismissed for failure to prosecute.
THUS DONE AND SIGNED in Shreveport, Louisiana, this 31st day of March,
2026.
Mark L. Hornsby

Get daily alerts for US District Court WDLA Docket Feed

Daily digest delivered to your inbox.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

About this page

What is GovPing?

Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission

What's from the agency?

Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from WDLA.

What's AI-generated?

The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.

Last updated

Classification

Agency
WDLA
Filed
March 31st, 2026
Compliance deadline
May 1st, 2026 (7 days)
Instrument
Enforcement
Branch
Judicial
Legal weight
Binding
Stage
Final
Change scope
Minor
Document ID
25-cv-008

Who this affects

Applies to
Legal professionals Criminal defendants Courts
Industry sector
3114 Food & Beverage Manufacturing
Activity scope
Civil litigation Default judgment Motion practice
Geographic scope
US-LA US-LA

Taxonomy

Primary area
Judicial Administration
Operational domain
Legal
Topics
Civil Rights Consumer Protection

Get alerts for this source

We'll email you when US District Court WDLA Docket Feed publishes new changes.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

You're subscribed!