Motion to Vacate: Time Limit in Washington, DC?

[nova3619]

I received a default judgment against a defendant who failed to show up to court in September (2010). He was notified by the court and contacted me three weeks later, saying he was willing to honor the contract (over which I was suing him). Obviously, this was no longer an option, and we've since exchanged a number of emails that have involved me trying to get payment and him saying he wants to perform the work.

Finally, in December, he wrote saying that because I told him (in November) that I no longer needed him to complete the project, he didn't feel he owed me anything and he wanted to return to court in January. I filed subpoena papers a couple of weeks ago (in an attempt to find out about his assets), and, in response, he has filed a motion to vacate the judgment. Can he do this at this late stage?

 

[cosine]

Sure, he can file a motion. How the court will act on it depends on whether he has arguments that justify vacating it. If he really did get the summons from the court in a timely manner, he cannot use "not served" as the excuse.

 

[latigo]

As mentioned you can’t prevent the judgment debtor from filing a motion requesting the court to set aside the default judgment. On grounds of excusable neglect in failing to respond to the complaint - most likely here - the motion must be made within one year of the date the judgment was entered. *
______________


[*] With one exception not relevant here Rule 60 (b) of Washington. D. C.’s Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure listing the grounds, procedure and time limits for seeking relief from judgment or order is identical to the same Rule 60 (b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Rule 60.
* * * * *
(b) Mistakes; inadvertence; excusable neglect; newly discovered evidence; fraud, etc.

On motion and upon such terms as are just, the Court may relieve a party or a party's legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: (1) Mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b); (3) fraud (whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; 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 1 year after the judgment, order, or proceeding was entered or taken. A motion under this subdivision (b) does not affect the finality of a judgment or suspend its operation. This Rule does not limit the power of a court to entertain an independent action to relieve a party from a judgment, order, or proceeding, or to set aside a judgment for fraud upon the court. * * * *

 

[nova3619]

He actually chose the trial date on the day of our mediation (and signed a document confirming), so he can't claim bad service; he simply failed to show.

His defense now seems to be that he was willing to complete the project and I refused to let him do so (though this was six weeks after the judgment).

Also, I notice rule 55 of the DC code addresses "default" and says a judgment must be vacated within 14 days of entry. Does this not apply here?