Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

Jones v. Caraday — Magistrate judge recommends denying default judgment for improper service

Reported / Citable

Case
Carolyn Yvonne Jones v. Caraday of Fort Worth d/b/a Willow Ridge
Court
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Judge
Hal R. Ray, Jr.
Date Decided
July 17, 2026
Docket No.
4:26-cv-00199-O-BP
Topics
Default Judgment; Service of Process; Disability Discrimination

Background

Pro se plaintiff Carolyn Yvonne Jones brought a disability-discrimination action under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Texas Labor Code against Caraday of Fort Worth, doing business as Willow Ridge. After an initial attempt to serve Caraday at a White Settlement facility failed because an employee said Caraday no longer owned the facility, Jones directed the U.S. Marshals Service to serve CT Corporation at a Dallas address.

The Marshals Service served a CT Corporation employee, and the clerk later entered default against Caraday. Jones then moved for default judgment. Because her filings did not establish that CT Corporation was authorized to accept service for Caraday, the court ordered her to show cause why her motion should not be denied.

The Court’s Holding

Magistrate Judge Hal R. Ray, Jr. recommended that Chief Judge Reed O’Connor deny Jones’s motion for default judgment without prejudice. The magistrate judge concluded that Jones had not shown that CT Corporation was Caraday’s registered agent and therefore had not established proper service, a jurisdictional prerequisite to default judgment.

Jones asked the court to take judicial notice of Texas Secretary of State records that she asserted identified CT Corporation System as Caraday’s registered agent. But she did not identify the specific database or webpage supporting that assertion. The court’s own review found an entity named “Caraday Ft Worth, LLC” whose registered agent was an individual in New Braunfels, not CT Corporation in Dallas, and found no entity registered under the precise name “Caraday of Fort Worth, LLC.”

Because a defendant has no duty to answer until service is perfected, the magistrate judge also recommended directing the clerk to set aside the entry of default. The recommendation permits Jones to renew her request for default judgment if circumstances change.

Key Takeaways

  • A clerk’s entry of default does not establish entitlement to default judgment when the plaintiff has not proved valid service of process.
  • A plaintiff seeking to serve a business through a registered agent must provide evidence that the recipient was authorized to accept service for the particular defendant.
  • Defective service constitutes good cause to set aside an entry of default because an unserved defendant has no duty to answer.

Why It Matters

The recommendation underscores that courts must confirm personal jurisdiction through proper service before entering default judgment, even when the clerk has already entered default. A plaintiff’s unsupported description of public business records is insufficient when those records do not establish that the person served was the defendant’s authorized agent.

The ruling is a magistrate judge’s recommendation, not a final disposition by the district judge. The parties may file specific written objections within 14 days after service of the recommendation.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top