Adams v. Corey

CourtSuperior Court of Maine
DecidedOctober 18, 2021
DocketAROcv-21-018
StatusUnpublished

This text of Adams v. Corey (Adams v. Corey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Adams v. Corey, (Me. Super. Ct. 2021).

Opinion

STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT AROOSTOOK, ss LOCATION: CARIBOU DOCKET NO.: CARSC-CV-2021-018

Stephen W. Adams, ) ) Plaintiff ) ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S ) MOTION TO SET ASIDE V. ) DEFAULT JUDGMENT ) ) Sheldon Corey, ) ) Defendant )

Defendant has filed a motion for relief from judgment pursuant to M.R.Crv.P.

55(c). The court has reviewed the motion and the objection thereto filed by Plaintiff. The

court determines that no hearing is necessary on the motion.

A party who moves for relief from a judgment bears 11 the burden of producing

competent evidence to support [the] motion. 11 Foley v. Adam, 638 A.2d 718, 719 (Me. 1994).

Generally, a motion to set aside a default judgment should be granted when a Defendant

can demonstrate that he had both (1) a good excuse for the default occurring; and (2) a

meritorious defense to the action. Charles Harvey, 2 Maine Civil Practice §55:7, p. 206-207

(2013-14 ed). The Defendant has failed to set forth any allegations to support a claim of

either a good excuse for the default occurring or a meritorious defense to the action.

Defendant's motion, to the extent it requests that the entry of default be set aside,

is DENIED. The thrust of the Defendant's motion relates to the issue of whether the complaint

is for a "sum certain". "Because the clerk has no power to enter a judgment for an

amount which is not a sum certain or which cannot be made certain by computation, any

judgment so entered is void." Interstate Food Processing Corp. v. Pellerito Foods, Inc., 622

A.2d 1189, 1193, (citing, Arekay Realty Group v. Lievi, 595 A.2d 1036, 1037 (Me. 1991)).

"The term 'sum certain' has been held to have a meaning similar to 'liquidated

amount.' See, generally 47 Am. Jur. 2d Judgments § 1157 (1969). 'A claim is

liquidated when the amount thereof has been ascertained and agreed upon by the

parties or fixed by operation of law.' Hallett Constr. Co. v. Iowa State Highway

Comm'n, 258 Iowa 520, 139 N.W.2d 421, 426 (1966). The term 'sum certain,'

therefore, contemplates a situation where the amount due cannot be

disputed. See Reynolds Sec., Inc. v. Underwriters Bank, 44 N.Y.2d 568, 406 N.Y.S.2d

743, 378 N.E.2d 106, 109 (1978). Such situations include actions on money

judgments, negotiable instruments, or similar actions where the damages sought

can be determined without resort to extrinsic proof." Id.

Although Plaintiff's complaint contains a concise itemized statement of the

damages claimed, "[t]he itemization of dollar amounts is not sufficient to achieve sum­

certain status when an item is as broad as "consequential damages ... of travel, lodging

and increased supervision" or 'financial loss ... to secure substitute performance of the

contract."' Maroon Flooring, Inc. v. Austin, 2007 ME 75, P13, 927 A.2d 1182, 1185. Here, the damages include not only estimates, but also financial loss to secure

substitute performance of the contract where Plaintiff contends the Defendant was in

breach. See, Complaint at ,r,r?(a) and 11.

The court finds that the complaint is not for a sum certain. The Defendant's motion

for the judgment to be set aside is GRANTED. Therefore, the Judgment is hereby set

aside and vacated as void.

The matter shall be scheduled for a telephonic pretrial conference in advance of

the hearing on the sole issue of damages.

Pursuant to Rule 79(a) of the Maine Rules of Civil Procedure, the Clerk is directed

to enter this Order on the Civil Docket by notation incorporating it by reference.

Dated: /tl,/lo'~C> JI

Maine Superior Court

:· 'JTf.RED ON THE DOCKET Jc) I11 }c)·'

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Hallett Construction Co. v. Iowa State Highway Commission
139 N.W.2d 421 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1966)
Foley v. Adam
638 A.2d 718 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1994)
Interstate Food Processing Corp. v. Pellerito Foods, Inc.
622 A.2d 1189 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1993)
Reynolds Securities, Inc. v. Underwriters Bank & Trust Co.
378 N.E.2d 106 (New York Court of Appeals, 1978)
Arekay Realty Group v. Lievi
595 A.2d 1036 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1991)
Maroon Flooring, Inc. v. Austin
2007 ME 75 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Adams v. Corey, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adams-v-corey-mesuperct-2021.