• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Can Court Set Aside Default Judgment Two Months Later Due to Court Error?

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

HelloTexas

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas

I won a default judgment because the defendant did not appear at trial in small claims court. When I went to court to enforce judgment two months later, I learned that the court did not mail defendant a notice that a default judgment was issued. Court called defendant who (I assume) requested a new trial. I simply received a letter in the mail 6 weeks ago (about a week after I went to court) saying new trial had been set. I did not receive any notice that a new trial would be considered (and given an opportunity to object), nor did I receive any notice about the reason defendant provided for missing trial.

Here is what I found via the law library for Texas Rules of Civil Procedure:

RULE 566. JUDGMENTS BY DEFAULT
A justice may within ten days after a judgment by default or of dismissal is signed, set aside such
judgment, on motion in writing, for good cause shown, supported by affidavit. Notice of such motion
shall be given to the opposite party at least one full day prior to the hearing thereof.

RULE 569. NOTICE
All motions to set aside a judgment or to grant a new trial, under the two preceding rules, shall be
made within five days after the rendition of judgment and one day's notice thereof shall be given
the opposite party or his attorney.

So based on what I see about setting aside default judgment, it must be done within 10 days. It's is not clear to me how court error affects this requirement. I feel I am taking the burden of the errors of defendant (for missing trial) and court (for not sending notice).

I submitted a letter to court objecting to new trial and requesting that the default judgment be held, and I received a voicemail from the clerk that my request has been denied.

Am I wrong to think that setting new trial goes against the rules, and, if so, what are my options?

Thanks for any advice!
 
Last edited:


tranquility

Senior Member
Default judgments are disfavored. Courts like decisions on the merits. Civil procedure is hard and arguing it harder still. What result?

Prepare to litigate your case.

I didn't even look to the deadlines or what the statutes or other Civ Pro guidelines say. Just saying. Now, you can not believe me and think there MUST be a way to keep what you already thought you had. If there is, you better get an attorney because you will be fighting a judge's decision on a legal matter. It will not be an exercise for a pro per and it will not be successful without a LOT of work. Unless you had no case, it is not going to be worth it to you.
 

latigo

Senior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas

I won a default judgment because the defendant did not appear at trial in small claims court. When I went to court to enforce judgment two months later, I learned that the court did not mail defendant a notice that a default judgment was issued. Court called defendant who (I assume) requested a new trial. I simply received a letter in the mail 6 weeks ago (about a week after I went to court) saying new trial had been set. I did not receive any notice that a new trial would be considered (and given an opportunity to object), nor did I receive any notice about the reason defendant provided for missing trial.

Here is what I found via the law library for Texas Rules of Civil Procedure:

RULE 566. JUDGMENTS BY DEFAULT
A justice may within ten days after a judgment by default or of dismissal is signed, set aside such
judgment, on motion in writing, for good cause shown, supported by affidavit. Notice of such motion
shall be given to the opposite party at least one full day prior to the hearing thereof.

RULE 569. NOTICE
All motions to set aside a judgment or to grant a new trial, under the two preceding rules, shall be
made within five days after the rendition of judgment and one day's notice thereof shall be given
the opposite party or his attorney.

So based on what I see about setting aside default judgment, it must be done within 10 days. It's is not clear to me how court error affects this requirement. I feel I am taking the burden of the errors of defendant (for missing trial) and court (for not sending notice).

I submitted a letter to court objecting to new trial and requesting that the default judgment be held, and I received a voicemail from the clerk that my request has been denied.

Am I wrong to think that setting new trial goes against the rules, and, if so, what are my options?

Thanks for any advice!
Where do you think the greater weight of injustice would fall?

Upon you because the case has been reverted to prejudgment status quo and you will now be put to the task of proving the merits of your claim.

Or upon the defendant, who because of the failure of the court to give notice of the entry of the default was unable to comply with
Rule 566?

If you are going to argue that it is deserving of the defendant because of his failure to appear initially, then you are quarreling with Texas law and the philosophy favoring decisions on the merits and need to take your case for rules reform before the Texas legislature.
 

HelloTexas

Junior Member
Thanks for all the responses!

Sounds like the defendant had good cause to discharge the default.
I have been curious about what she said. From what I can make of the rules I should have been provided that correspondence, yes?

The defendant first requested a continuance just before trial, saying she needed to track down some documents. I expect this request was denied because she then came and said she needed to help a family member for health (which was granted). Then once again at the last minute (1 or 2 days before) she requested a longer continuance for the same reason. And then she did not show for trial. That she first requested continuance to track down documents leaves me unsure whether her subsequent requests were genuine.

Where do you think the greater weight of injustice would fall?

Upon you because the case has been reverted to prejudgment status quo and you will now be put to the task of proving the merits of your claim.

Or upon the defendant, who because of the failure of the court to give notice of the entry of the default was unable to comply with
Rule 566?

If you are going to argue that it is deserving of the defendant because of his failure to appear initially, then you are quarreling with Texas law and the philosophy favoring decisions on the merits and need to take your case for rules reform before the Texas legislature.
Admittedly my position is biased but I feel that justice did occur. She owes me money. I presented the written contract at trial. She had an opportunity to present her case but she did not show. That is three times I have prepared for trial where she has requested a continuance at the last minute or not shown, and what she owes me remains tied up.

She might not have known about Rule 566 but she did know about the trial. She did not make any attempt to contact court after missing trial until I tried to enforce judgment two months later, and the court called her. Again, I am likely biased but it feels to me that she was not responsible or organized about her trial and I am having to take the burden in the form of time (to prepare, drive, and attend trial once again) and wait for what I am owed. If the court made an error then why not direct the burden at the party who made the error (who did not show for trial, and then made no effort to contact court for two months thereafter)?

Perhaps my frustration is getting the best of me. So I will take your perspectives as objective ones and soak them in to temper how I feel. But I have been thinking that I am not asking for reform but for court to go by existing rules (that a judgment can only be set aside within 10 days). I have not found anything in the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure for Justice Court that speak to the current situation (what happens if Court makes error and does not send notice, and what creates exceptions to Rule 566) and if there is any other place I should look, I would appreciate the pointer. It seems you are saying the other place to look is not statute or rules of civil procedure but the general philosophy in case law.

Unless you had no case, it is not going to be worth it to you
Thanks for the grounded, practical advice. I did speak with an attorney through a lawyer referral service who was surprised and thought I had room to object but concluded that the size of the case did not justify retaining an attorney. She sent me back to the referral service, who said to try elsewhere since the next attorney they refer me to might say the same. Your point makes sense. It will be probably be easier to track down the documents and organize my thoughts again than to prepare for a whole different battle. I was hoping it might have been as simple as writing a letter quoting the specific rules.
 
Last edited:

latigo

Senior Member
. . . . I was hoping it might have been as simple as writing a letter quoting the specific rules.
May I remind you that judges do not need to be reminded of their own court’s procedural rules? In fact they can become downright nasty over that sort of uninvited officiousness.

May I again remind you that the scientific method with its empirically predictable results has no place in the field of law. And with each judgeship comes a certain and often overriding range of discretion.

Also, in spite of your complaints, I haven’t detected much of a ground swell of sympathy for your position. Nor any compelling argument warranting a shift in a philosophy that favors rulings based upon a lawsuit’s worth and frequently condones an opponent’s neglect or omissions.

As the old saying goes: “The boss may not always be right but he is always the boss.”
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top