General Insurance Company of America v. Hess

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff, 	Case No. 2:24-cv-11043
vs. 	Hon. Brandy R. McMillion
United States District Judge
DANIEL HESS d/b/a HESS WOOD
FLOOR SERVICE AND
USAA INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendants.
/
ORDER OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT AGAINST
DEFENDANT DANIEL HESS d/b/a HESS WOOD FLOOR SERVICE
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff General Insurance Company of
America’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion for Entry of Default Judgment (ECF No. 19). The
Court having personal jurisdiction over Defendants and subject matter jurisdiction
over this action; and having fully reviewed 	and 	considered 	the Motion, all
memoranda, exhibits attached thereto, and the documents filed and of record in this
action, and arguments of counsel presented at the hearing on November 12, 20251;
1 Notice of the Hearing on the Motion for Default was properly served upon Defendant Daniel
Hess d/b/a Hess Wood Floor Service (“Hess”) on October 21, 2025 (see ECF No. 24); however,
Hess failed to appear at the hearing.
Case 2:24-cv-11043-BRM-KGA ECF No. 25, PageID.<pageID> Filed 11/12/25 Page 1 of 3

2
and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, the Court hereby makes the
following findings:
1. 	On April 9, 2024, Plaintiff filed the Complaint in this action and
subsequent thereto, duly served Defendant Daniel Hess d/b/a Hess Wood Floor
Service (“Hess”) with copies of the Complaint and Summons. 	See ECF Nos. 1, 3,
5.
2. 	Hess failed to timely answer the Complaint, and the Clerk entered
default against Hess on July 9, 2024. ECF No. 11.
3. 	Plaintiff filed the present Motion for Default Judgment on October 7,
2025. ECF No. 19.
4. 	Upon entry of a default, the defendant is deemed to have admitted all
the well-pleaded allegations in the complaint, including jurisdictional averments.
Ford Motor Company v Cross, 441 F. Supp. 2d 837, 846 (E.D. Mich 2006).
5. 	As set forth in the Complaint, Plaintiff issued the Businessowners
Commercial Policy No. BWG671297551 to Hess for the policy period effective
December 16, 2023 through December 16, 2024 (the “Policy”). 	See ECF No. 1,
PageID.3. 	On April 11, 2024, General rescinded the General Policy as of its
effective 	date 	of 	December 	16, 	2023 	because 	Hess 	made 	a 	material
misrepresentation in the policy application by failing to disclose a prior fire loss. Id.
at PageID.3-4; see also ECF No. 1-2.
Case 2:24-cv-11043-BRM-KGA ECF No. 25, PageID.<pageID> Filed 11/12/25 Page 2 of 3

3
6. 	As set forth in the Complaint, Hess failed to disclose that he had made
an insurance claim for fire loss in 2021 (which was within the three years prior to
applying for the Policy). Had Plaintiff known about 2021 fire loss claim, it would
have not issued the Policy. ECF No. 1, PageID.4.
7. 	Before Plaintiff rescinded the policy, Co-Defendant USAA Insurance
Company submitted a subrogation demand under the policy, for property damage
resulting from fire loss. Id.
8. 	However, Plaintiff is not liable for that demand because Plaintiff
properly rescinded Businessowners Commercial Policy No. BWG671297551 based
on Hess’s material misrepresentations.
Based on these findings, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
(1) 	Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment is GRANTED.
(2) 	General Insurance Company of America has no duty to provide
coverage to Daniel Hess d/b/a Hess Wood Floor Service under the
General Policy.
(3) 	Plaintiff shall promptly serve a copy of the Order on Defendant Daniel
Hess d/b/a Hess Wood Floor Service.
This is a final order that closes the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 12, 2025 	s/Brandy R. McMillion
Detroit, Michigan 	H ON. BRANDY R. MCMILLION
United States District Judge
Case 2:24-cv-11043-BRM-KGA ECF No. 25, PageID.<pageID> Filed 11/12/25 Page 3 of 3