UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-2133
MICHAEL C. WORSHAM,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
TRAVEL OPTIONS, INC.; CLIFFORD SHANNON,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, District Judge.
(1:14-cv-02749-JKB)
Submitted: February 23, 2017 Decided: March 3, 2017
Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael C. Worsham, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Michael Craig Worsham appeals the district court’s order
entering default judgment in his favor on some of his claims,
while denying judgment on other claims. Pursuant to Fed. R.
Civ. P. 55(a), when a party against whom judgment is sought has
failed to plead, the clerk must enter the party’s default. The
court may then enter a default judgment upon the motion of a
party, and may conduct hearings to determine the amount of
damages. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2).
“The defendant, by his default, admits the plaintiff’s
well-pleaded allegations of fact.” Ryan v. Homecomings Fin.
Network, 253 F.3d 778, 780 (4th Cir. 2001) (internal quotation
marks omitted). “The court must, therefore, determine whether
the well-pleaded allegations in the [] complaint support the
relief sought in [the] action.” Id. “‘[A] defendant’s default
does not in itself warrant the court in entering a default
judgment. There must be a sufficient basis in the pleadings for
the judgment entered.’” DIRECTV, Inc. v. Pernites, 200 F. App’x
257, 258 (4th Cir. 2006) (No. 04-2483) (quoting Nishimatsu
Constr. Co. v. Houston Nat’l Bank, 515 F.2d 1200, 1206 (5th Cir.
1975)). “Further, a ‘defendant is not held to admit facts that
are not well-pleaded or to admit conclusions of law.’” DIRECTV,
200 F. App’x at 258 (citing Nishimatsu, 515 F.2d at 1206)). We
have thoroughly reviewed the record and conclude that the
2
district court did not commit reversible error in entering
default judgment on some of Worsham’s claims, while denying
judgment in his favor on his remaining claims.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order and deny
Worsham’s motions for costs and to compel answers to
interrogatories in aid of execution. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3