Torre v. Davies Life & Health, Inc. (2025)

Case details
Full caption
Graciela Dela Torre v. Davies Life & Health, Inc., et al.
Country
United States
Jurisdiction
Federal
Decided
2025
Disposition
Motion Denied
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF NextGen 1.8 (rev. 1.8.3)Eastern DivisionGraciela Dela TorrePlaintiff,v.Case No.: 1:25−cv−01483Honorable Edmond E. ChangDavies Life & Health, Inc., et al.Defendant.NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRYThis docket entry was made by the Clerk on Friday, April 11, 2025: MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: (1.) On review of thePlaintiff's motions and filings [30] [32] [33] [34] asking to deem Defendant Nippon LifeInsurance in default, the motions are denied. A prior order of the Court stated that certifiedmail is not a proper way to effectuate service. R. 29. Despite this, the Plaintiff asserts thatservice by certified mail on Nippon Life is effective. R. 32 at 2, R. 33 at 3, R. 34 at 2.None of the authorities cited by the Plaintiff support that proposition. Indeed, even givingthe pro se Plaintiff the benefit of expansive leeway, the reliance on the citations isfrivolous. (A.) Civil Rule 4(e)(1) simply refers to the state law of the forum for service,and the Plaintiff's citation to 735 ILCS 5/2−203.1 does not at all address service bycertified mail. Instead, Section 2−203.1 simply allows plaintiffs to move for authorizationto serve by alternative means. The Plaintiff has not obtained an order with thatauthorization. (B.) The citation to Kirkland v. American Title Ins. Co., "692 F. Supp. 153,155 (N.D. Ill. 1988)," R. 33 at 3, is no help. The case was decided by the Eastern Districtof New York, not the Northern District. Neither the pinpoint page (at 155) or any otherpart of the opinion deals with service of summons, let alone certified mail (the term"certified mail" does not appear in the opinion). (C.) The citation to United States v.Balan, 2013 WL 5539296 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 7, 2013), is also incorrect: the Westlaw citationnumber brings up a case from Louisiana state court, Trahan v. Verret, 2013 WL 5539296(La. App. Ct. 2013). A search for a case title with that name in 2013 in the NorthernDistrict results in no cases. (D.) The citation to People ex rel. Devine v. $30,700.00 U.S.Currency, 199 Ill. 2d 142 (2002), does not apply here, because Devine was an Illinois stateforfeiture case governed by completely different statutes governing notice of forfeiture.199 Ill.2d at 149−50. (E.) Lastly, the citation in the two most recent filings, R. 33 at 3, R.34 at 2, to In re Marriage of Schmitt, 391 Ill. App. 3d 1010, 101617 (2d Dist. 2009),makes no sense because that case deals with a dissolution of marriage and has nodiscussion at all about service of process (let alone by certified mail). The citations wastedjudicial resources. (2.) Given the absence of effective service, Nippon Insurance's request,R. 31, to waive service is granted. The response to the complaint is due on 06/09/2025.(3.) The Court emphasizes the need for the Plaintiff to respond as directed in the order of04/09/2025, R. 29, that is, to explain why this case should not be considered a refiling of1:22−cv−07059. Emailed notice(eec)Case: 1:25-cv-01483 Document #: 35 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:158
ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules ofCivil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It wasgenerated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil andcriminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, pleaserefer to it for additional information.For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit ourweb site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.Case: 1:25-cv-01483 Document #: 35 Filed: 04/11/25 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:159
ProvenanceKnow exactly where this document came from.Members see the sourcing behind every authority on DocPost — so you can check the record yourself and cite with confidence.Request access