denied a motion to vacate default judgement - now what?

[babaganoosh]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? We're in NJ. A medical facility is sueing me for not paying for a procedure from 2 years ago. I didn't know about the suit till I got a notice form my credit monitoring service that there was a judgement entered against me (the amount I owed was around $450, then with costs it was up to $550 or so).

the court clerk said I was notified by regular and certified mail. The regular mail didn't come back to them but the certified did come back / was never signed for.

I filed a motion to vacate the default judgement - I always heard that was a rubber stamp type of thing - the courts don't want to take away a person's chance to defend themselves in court.

I got the denial letter today saying my motion was denied because I was notified by regular and certified mail. But then it also added that i can appeal this denial by explaining why I didn't respond. I had said in the motion that we weren't notified about the suit. (sorry, I can't put my hands on the paper right now to quote it verbatim)

any advice on how to appeal a denial of a motion to vacate a default judgement? Am I just wasting my time?

To add insult to injury, while I was filing the motion, the plaintiff turned the judgement over to a court officer (add another $65) and they filed a levy with my bank (another $125 fee). all together, I'll be out something like $850.

If I knew about the case and lost it, I would pay immediately and avoid the court officer and levy charges at least. how can I reverse the clock at this point?!

 

[justalayman]

with your original motion: what was the basis of your motion?

 

[tranquility]

There is no meaning to appeal a denial to vacate judgment for logical reasons.

If you have a legal reason to appeal the actual decision, then do that.

 

[babaganoosh]

with your original motion: what was the basis of your motion?

that we were not notified of the case (taht's what I wrote on the motion)

..If you have a legal reason to appeal the actual decision, then do that.

the clerk says the paperwork was sent to me via regular mail and didn't come back and by certified mail - that did come back to them unsigned (we didn't get notified of a certified letter).

is not getting the paperwork (and the clerk having that info above) a legal reason?

or is 'we sent it and that's what counts? receiving it is up to you and the post office?

 

[Zigner]

Was the mail that was sent to you sent to your correct address?

 

[babaganoosh]

yes, they had my correct address in the paperwork. what was on the envelopes, I don't know.

 

[Zigner]

yes, they had my correct address in the paperwork. what was on the envelopes, I don't know.

Then it sounds like you have no defense. You were properly served.

 

[babaganoosh]

being properly served doesn't deal with whether you got the papers, just that they sent it : ( ?

 

[Zigner]

being properly served doesn't deal with whether you got the papers, just that they sent it : ( ?

They PROPERLY sent them. The court can't help if you ignore your mail.

 

[tranquility]

I agree with Zigner. It seems you were served. I don't think you could appeal.

By the way, would you have any defense to the claim the judgment was based upon?

 

[babaganoosh]

thanks for the info. so other than being able to show they sent to the wrong address, what types of things get OK'd for vacating default judgement?

And for the defense - I was partly hoping that they have you try mediation before going in front of the judge and save money due that way. the issue was a colonoscopy I had done in 2008. I called the surgery center before the surgery to ask what costs I would be responsible for after insurance. they said that they would accept the insurance payment as complete payment. that was the same thing I had when I had knee surgery a few months before that - I got the gist that what they get from insurance is better than having me go elsewhere (hospital, etc.) and they don't get my business. Since that's what happened with the knee surgery, I dfidn't see a need to have caution about this.

But then when insurance settled and I still owed $400+, I called reminding the colonoscopy place of my conversation and they said that was not the case - I still owed the $$.

Admittedly, that 'verbal contract' I had with someone I can't identify is not the best defense. But I was hoping to get to the mediation they do before / instead of getting to a judge.

If I knew it was going to cost $$, I would have had the proceedure done at the hospital where it would be covered better (in network vs. the cononoscopy place being out of network). again, exactly what happened with the knee surgery - they want the business enough to take the insurance only.

shame on me for not being more cautious?

 

[Zigner]

thanks for the info. so other than being able to show they sent to the wrong address, what types of things get OK'd for vacating default judgement?

If you could prove you were medically incapacitated at the time of the trial, you would have a shot.

 

[babaganoosh]

thanks - no, just didn't know about the case.

 

[justalayman]

to be clear; search the requirements for service for the court involved. If service was proper, you have no defense. If the service was not proper, then you file to vacate the judgment based on ineffective or improper service..

each state and often each level of court within that state, has their own rules of service. What took place in yours may very well be allowed and proper. In some states it isn't. Just make sure it is in your case.

 

[Zigner]

to be clear; search the requirements for service for the court involved. If service was proper, you have no defense. If the service was not proper, then you file to vacate the judgment based on ineffective or improper service..

each state and often each level of court within that state, has their own rules of service. What took place in yours may very well be allowed and proper. In some states it isn't. Just make sure it is in your case.

I agree with you but I'd like to point out that the court has already determined service was proper based on the cert. mail/regular mail combination...so I was ASSuming that it was a proper method of service in our OP's state.