This case involves a dispute over parties' rights to financial assets. Plaintiff Patricia

Similar documents
DIRECTIONS FOR FILING A MOTION TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT IN DISTRICT COURT

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE September 9, 2008 Session. VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY v. NEW HOPE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE March 24, 2009 Session

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE June 2000 Session. VICTORIA ROBBINS v. BILL WOLFENBARGER, D/B/A WOLF S MOTORS and SAM HORNE

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON September 21, 2005 Session

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff-Appellant, Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

Court of Appeals of Ohio

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA,

SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON May 2000 Session

Submitted September 6, 2017 Decided. Before Judges Alvarez and Gooden Brown.

Utah Court Rules on Trial Motions Francis J. Carney

. Q,~PER ON DEFENDANT'S v. ': 'MOTION FOR TO SET ASIDE SUMMARY JUDGMENT -.\. ,.,",", l "~, : ;e".. ~'<l FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Case 2:11-cv BSJ Document 460 Filed 02/02/17 Page 1 of 10

ANOROSCO~GIN ; SUPERIOR cyurt j ) ) Presently before the court is Defendant Regis Corporation's motion to set aside

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE November 4, 2008 Session

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS (FILED DECEMBER 11, 2009) DECISION

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE June 29, 2007 Session

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, Defendants.

MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT/ORDER

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE April 15, 2015 Session

ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

NOTICE OF MOTION. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that at a.m./p.m. on, Defendant(s) will bring the following Motion on for hearing before the Honorable MOTION

SEMINOLE TRIBE OF FLORIDA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON April 5, 2005 Session

MOTION TO VACATE FINAL JUDGMENT OF FORECLOSURE AND INCORPORATED MEMORANDUM OF LAW

Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v Stevens 2016 NY Slip Op 32404(U) December 7, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2008 Judge:

Case 1:15-cv KBJ Document 16 Filed 03/18/16 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE Assigned on Briefs November 29, 2007

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE February 11, 2005 Session

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS

Pending before the court is an appeal of the District Court Small Claims Notice of

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM v. Case No. 5D

SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION MECKLENBURG COUNTY 04 CVS 22242

Argued March 23, 2017 Decided May 15, Before Judges O'Connor and Whipple.

Before the court is defendant Walter Kidde Portable Equipment, Inc.'s motion to dismiss

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, January Term, A.D. 2009

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE June 10, 2004 Session. MARK K. McGEHEE v. JULIE A. McGEHEE

Court of Appeals of Ohio

Case acs Doc 52 Filed 08/20/15 Entered 08/20/15 16:11:30 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY

WHEN IS A FORECLOSURE SALE FINAL IN NORTH CAROLINA?

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO TENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT. Plaintiff-Appellant, : No. 05AP-217 (C.P.C. No. 04CVC ) v. : (REGULAR CALENDAR)

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 7 April 2015

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TAOS COUNTY John M. Paternoster, District Judge

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM Appellants, v. Case No. 5D

COURT OF APPEALS STARK COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

Case 1:11-cv LG -RHW Document 32 Filed 12/08/11 Page 1 of 11

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA. January 2019 Term. No

IN THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA

This case concerns an insurance claim made by plaintiff Kherallah Salleh with respect to

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE February 8, 2007 Session

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY CAMDEN VICINAGE

8 California Procedure (5th), Attack on Judgment in Trial Court

Ventures Trust 2013-I-H-R v Tsimmer 2017 NY Slip Op 30570(U) March 23, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /15 Judge: Barbara

Bank of Smithtown v Lightening Realty Corp NY Slip Op 31302(U) May 6, 2011 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: /09 Judge: Thomas

FLORIDA SMALL CLAIMS RULES

CACH, LLC v. Taylor, Del: Court of Common Pleas CACH, LLC, Plaintiff, v. DEBORAH J. TAYLOR, Defendant. No. CPUU

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE March 6, 2012 Session

Case 1:04-cv RHB Document 171 Filed 08/11/2005 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

LaSalle Bank, N.A. v Rodriguez 2011 NY Slip Op 31086(U) April 28, 2011 Sup Ct, Queens County Docket Number: 5129/07 Judge: Allan B.

Supreme Court of Florida

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Sposato 2013 NY Slip Op 30034(U) January 7, 2013 Sup Ct, Richmond County Docket Number: /08 Judge: Joseph J.

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/30/ :54 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 51 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2016

Case 0:06-cv JIC Document 97 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/10/2013 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Federal Hous. Fin. Agency v UBS Real Estate Sec., Inc NY Slip Op 31458(U) July 27, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /12

HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v Rodney 2016 NY Slip Op 30761(U) April 12, 2016 Supreme Court, Queens County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Robert J.

ORDER TO SHOW. NYCTL TRUST, and THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON as Collateral Agent and Custodian for CAUSE

FLORIDA SMALL CLAIMS RULES TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Murky Waters between Small Claims and Civil District Court

NC General Statutes - Chapter 93A Article 2 1

Blanco, Tackabery & Matamoros, P.A., by Peter J. Juran, for Plaintiff Progress Builders, LLC.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR GREENE COUNTY, OHIO. Plaintiff-Appellee : C.A. CASE NO CA 80. v. : T.C. NO. 95 TRC D

THE COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH APPELLATE DISTRICT GEAUGA COUNTY, OHIO. Civil Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas, Case No. 07 F

GREATER ATLANTIC LEGAL SERVICES, INC.

Merchant Cash & Capital, LLC v G&E Asian Am. Enter., Inc NY Slip Op 31592(U) July 29, 2016 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number:

Plaintiff United States of America ( plaintiff ) commenced this action seeking payment for the indebtedness of

Reem Contr. v Altschul & Altschul 2016 NY Slip Op 30059(U) January 12, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2011 Judge: Kelly

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 2 February 2016

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

ST.A T:: o r:- MArN. Cumber, 6 -~.., E: -, " ~"' C'erk's Office. JUL 1,.a RE Cc. /VEO

The Bank of New York Mellon, f/k/a The Bank of New York, as Trustee on behalf of

U.S. Bank, N.A. v Campbell 2015 NY Slip Op 30390(U) March 16, 2015 Supreme Court, Queens County Docket Number: 11601/2012 Judge: Robert J.

Case 2:08-cv PMP -GWF Document 536 Filed 07/28/11 Page 1 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION ORDER

Case 2:15-cv BMS Document 34 Filed 02/01/16 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MEMORANDUM

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO. Plaintiff-Appellee : C.A. Case Nos and 21052

Transcription:

STATE OF MANE YORK, SS. SUPEROR COURT OVL ACTON DOCKET NO. CV-14-0138 PATRCA VOGEL, Plaintiff, V. FRANK MOSKAL, Defendant, ORDER and STEVE CURWOOD, Party-in-interest.. Background a. Procedural History This case involves a dispute over parties' rights to financial assets. Plaintiff Patricia Vogel brought this action against defendant Frank Moskal. Plaintiff also named party-in-interest Steve Curwood in the complaint because of an alleged debt he owed plaintiff and defendant. All counts in the complaint were brought solely against defendant. Party-in-interest was served the summons and complaint on July 22, 2014, but never filed a responsive pleading or otherwise appeared. Defendant passed away on or about December 12, 2014. Plaintiff thereafter moved to substitute as defendant Judith Moskal-Kanz, the personal representative of the decedent's estate and the trustee of Frank J. Moskal Trust. The court granted the motion to substitute on March 11, 2015. 'Plaintiff and substituted defendant settled their claims on or about December 12, 2014. 1

' Through counsel, plaintiff sought an entry of default and default judgment against party in-interest. Pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 55(b)(l) plaintiff filed an affidavit with her request that stated "defendant failed to appear, plead or otherwise defend this action." (Pl.'s Aff. ~ 1.) The affidavit aiso stated the "[p]laintiffs claim against defendant is for a sum certain, or for a sum which can by computation be made certain, and the amount now due by the Defendant to the Plaintiff on the claim set forth in the complaint in this action is the sum of $15,000.00, plus interest and costs," and "the debt was assigned to plaintiff by co-defendant..." (Pl.' s Aff. 11 1, 4-5.) The word "defendant" was corrected to "party-in-interest" throughout the second page of the Request for Default, Entry of Default, and Default Judgment. On July 8, 2015, the Clerk entered defauit and default judgment based upon representations made in the affidavit. Plaintiff subsequently obtained a Writ of Execution against party-in-interest on September 8, 2015. Plaintiff then filed an action for Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in a New Hampshire Superior Court in October of 2015. (P...'s Mot. to Set Aside and Vacate Default at 2.) Before the comi is party-in-interest's motion to set aside default, vacate default judgment, and for sanctions pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 11. b. Facts Plaintiff contends she and the original defendant formerly owned a residence in South Windsor, Co1:1..necticut as joint tenants. (Pl.' s Comp 1. i 5.) The property was allegedly sold in 2010 and the proceeds deposited into a joint account. (Pl. 's Compl. 1, 4, 6.) Party-in-interest allegedly received $25,000 from the joint account. (Pl.'s Compl. ~ 12.) Plaintiff and defendant stated in initial pleadings the $25,000 was a loan. (Compl. ~ 12; Def. 's Ans.~ 12.) The settlement agreement between plaintiff and defendant assigned plaintiff the "Curwood Loan." (P... Mot. to Set Aside Default Ex. F.) The Assignment of Debt pursuant to + 2

the 'settlement agreement reads as follows: Assignor hereby assigns, transfers, conveys, sells, bargains, and set over unto the Assignee all of its right, title and interest in and to a claim of DEBT dated March 12, 2012, in the original principal amount of $25,000, allegedly given by STEVE CURWOOD to FRANK J. MOSKAL and PATRJCA VOGEL... The intention of this assignment is to convey to the Assignee any and all rights the Assignor has or had in and to the Debt, and to clarify that any and all repayments of said debt are to be make to and at the direction of the Assignee solely.. ; (P... Mot. to Set Aside Default Ex. H.) Party-in-interest maintains there was no debt owed because the defendant extinguished the remainder of the $25,000 loan in anticipation of his death in accordance with a mutual understanding that party-in-interest would look after defendant's daughter. (P... Mot. to Set Aside Default 114.). Discussion a. Motion to Set Aside Default and Vacate Default Judgment Maine Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) requires a claim for relief contain both a statement of the claim and a demand for judgment. M.R. Civ. P. S(a). "The function of the complaint is to provide fair notice' of the claim and a generalized statement of the facts m;y fulfill this function." E. N Nason, nc. v. Land-Ho Development Corp., 403 A.2d 1173, 1177 (Me. 1979). Plaintiff did not name party-in-interest as a defendant or state a demand for judgment against him. Plaintiff sought relief solely against defendant and their settlement awarded plaintiff the right to collect "any and all rights the Assignor has or had in and to the Debt." The complaint alleged that a debt existed, and defendant admitted in his answer the funds were a loan. However, neither party included a demand for judgment that sought to determine their rights in or to the alleged debt. A defendant must serve his answer within 20 days after being served with the summons and complaint. M.R. Civ. P. 12(a). Rule 12(b) requires that "[e]very defense, in law or fact, to a claim for relief in any pleading... shall be asserted in the responsive pleading thereto if one is., :)

required." M'.R. Civ. P 12(b ). n this case, party-in-interest did not heed to serve and answer or assert a defense because no claims were asserted against him. Default may be entered when there is a judgment for affirmative relief sought against a party and the party has failed to plead or appear. M.R. Civ. P. 55(a). When there is no claim made against a party or party-in-interest they may not be defaulted. Similarly, the Clerk may only enter default judgment against a defendant when the plaintiff has made a claim against defendant for a sum certain and the defendant has failed to appear. M.R. Civ. P. 55(b)(l); see also Arekay Realty Group v. Lievi, 595 A.2d 1036, 1037 (Me. 1991). t is axiomatic that the court may not enter a judgment against a party when there is no claim made against such party. See M.R. Civ. P. 54. Nonetheless, once entered a final default judgment may only be set aside in accordance with Maine Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b).. Ezell v. Lawless, 2008 ME 139, 116, 955 A.2d 202. Rule 60(b) provides in relevant part: On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party 'or the party's legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;... (3) fraud (whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party; ( 4) the judgment is void;... or (6) any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment. The motion shall be made within a reasonable time, and for reasons (1), (.2), and (3) not more than one year after the judgment, order, or proceeding was entered or taken. 1 M.R. Civ. P. 60(b). n a Rule 60(b) proceeding the court must weigh the policy preference for finality of judgments against the desire to prevent an injustice. Reville v. Reville, 370 A.2d 249, 253 (Me. 1977). Relief is appropriate when the original judgment is shown to be unjust. Moulton v. Brown, 627 A.2d 521, 523 (Me. 1993). "[T]he trial courts, considering the circumstances of Party-in-interest moves for 'relief from judgment under M.R. Civ. P. 60(b) citing only subparts (1 ), (3), (4), and (6). Thus; the court does not include subparts Rule 60(b)(2) or (5). 4

j each case, have a broad range of discretion in considering requests for relief and remedies pursuant to Rule 60(b)." Ezell, 2008 ME 139, ~ 19, 955 A.2d 202. i. Rule 60(b)(l) "To obtain reli_ef from a default judgment under Rule 60(b)(l) for excusable neglect, a party must show (1) a reasonable excuse for her inattention to the court proceedings, and (2) a meritorious defense to the underlying action." d,r 22. The absence of a claim against party-in interest provides a reasonable excuse for his inattention to the court proceedings. Pa1iy-ininterest also has a meritorious defense to the alleged debt oligation. "Relief is obtainable whether the neglect or inadvertence or mistake is that of the moving party, of the court, or of a third party." 2 Harvey, Maine Civil Practice 297-98 (3d, 2011 ed.). The request for and entry of default and default judgment was a mistake. Thus, party-in-interest is entitled to relief from judgment pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1 ). The same facts that support setting aside the judgment also demonstrate good cause to set aside the default. M.R. Civ. P. 55(c). b. Motion for Sanctions Pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 11 "All pleadings must be signed as certification 'that to the best of the signer's knowledge, information, and belief there is good ground to support it."' Pepperell Trust Co. v. Mountain Heir Fin. Corp., 1998 ME 46,,r 12, 708 A.2d 651 (quoting M.R. Civ. P. 11). "f a pleading or motion is signed with intent to defeat the purpose of [Rule 11], the court... may impose upon the person who signed _it, upon a represented party, or upon both, an appropriate sanction." M.R. Civ. P. 11. Parr;-in-interest seeks sanctions pursuant to Rule 11 alleging there was no good ground to suppo1i the Request for Entry of Default and Default Judgment or the accompanying affidavit. Party-in-interest wa's joined in this action and failed to respond. A request for de.fault. 5

and default judgment may have been a mistake, but plaintiff and her counsel believed there were proper grounds to support the filings when they were signed based upon party-in-interest's t complete failure to answer or appear. While the court fmds there were insufficient grounds for the Request and affidavit, the filings were not signed by plaintiff or her attomey 2 with the intent to defeat the purpose of Rule 11. Therefore, sanctions are denied.. Conclusion For the aforementioned reasons, party-in-interest's motion to set aside default and to vacate default judgment are GRANTED. Party-in-interest's motion for sanctions is DENED. Therefore it is hereby ORDERED: 1..The Default Judgment entered against party-in interest Steve Curwood on July 8, 2015 and the subsequent Writ of Execution issued on September 8, 2015 are vacated. 2. The Entry of Default entered against party-ininterest Steve Curwood on July 8, 2015 is set aside. 3. Plaintiff shall cause any foreign ' or domestic proceedings seeking to impose the now vacated Default Judgment to be dismissed. 4. The clerk may incorporate this order upon the docket by reference pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 79(a). SO ORDERED. Dated: November 3t, 2016 Hon. John O'Neil Jr. Justice, Superior Court 2 Attorney Bailey is a well-respected member of the York Bar and while the Request for Entry of Default and Default Judgment was imprudent ih this case, the court does not find she sought to mislead the court. 6