FARRAGUT VILLAGE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION v. Bowling

896 A.2d 1079, 168 Md. App. 376, 2006 Md. App. LEXIS 54
CourtCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland
DecidedApril 13, 2006
Docket0808, September Term, 2005
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 896 A.2d 1079 (FARRAGUT VILLAGE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION v. Bowling) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Special Appeals of Maryland primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
FARRAGUT VILLAGE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION v. Bowling, 896 A.2d 1079, 168 Md. App. 376, 2006 Md. App. LEXIS 54 (Md. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

CHARLES E. MOYLAN, Jr., J,

Retired, Specially Assigned.

The appellant is Farragut Village Condominium Association Section III. The appellee, Jean Ann Bowling, has been an owner of a unit within the condominium complex since 1973. Aggrieved at the alleged failure of Bowling to pay her monthly assessment fees since July of 2000, the Condominium, on November 1, 2004, sent Bowling a Notice of Intent to Create a Condominium Lien on her unit.

Bowling’s counterattack of November 29, 2004, is the subject matter of this appeal. On that day, Bowling filed in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County a Complaint to Determine Probable Cause for the Establishment of a Lien against her. She also filed an extensive counterclaim, alleging 1) a breach of contract; 2) the conversion of insurance proceeds; 3) disparagement of property and interference with a business relationship; and 4) fraud, misrepresentation, and bad faith. The Condominium did not make timely answer to the complaint.

The Order of Default

Accordingly, on February 1, 2005, Bowling requested an Order of Default, pursuant to Maryland Rule 2-613(b). Judge Paul A. Hackner entered an Order of Default on February 11, 2005. Rule 2-613(b) provides, in pertinent part:

(b) Order of default. If the time for pleading has expired and a defendant has failed to plead as provided by *378 these rules, the court, on written request of the plaintiff, shall enter an order of default.

(Emphasis supplied).

The Motion to Vacate the Order of Default

The Condominium was given proper notice of the Order of Default by the clerk’s office pursuant to Rule 2-613(c). The Condominium then had 30 days within which to move to vacate the order. Subsection (d) covers not only the timing of such a motion to vacate but also the required contents of such a motion.

(d) Motion by defendant. The defendant may move to vacate the order of default within 30 days after its entry. The motion shall state the reasons for the failure to plead and the legal and factual basis for the defense to the claim.

On March 8, 2005, within the prescribed 30-day period, the Condominium filed a Motion to Vacate Entry of Order by Default. On March 18 Bowling filed an Opposition to Motion to Vacate, and on March 28 the Condominium filed a Response to Bowling’s Opposition. On May 5, 2005, Judge Paul G. Goetzke passed an Order denying the Condominium’s Motion to Vacate the Order of Default.

When Is a Default Judgment Final?

The Condominium argues strenuously that both prongs of Rule 2-613(d) were satisfied. Bowling argues, equally strenuously, that Rule 2-613(d) was not satisfied, or at least that Judge Goetzke had it within his discretion so to find. At this point, however, we find, nostra sponte and without any assistance from appellant or appellee, that it is unnecessary for us to consider the adequacy of the Condominium’s Motion to Vacate. The subsequent events make clear that we are dealing with a premature appeal from a non-appealable interlocutory order.

On May 13, the Condominium filed a motion to Strike Improper Service and/or In the Alternative a Motion to Re *379 consider and a Motion for New Trial. Bowling filed an Opposition to the Condominium’s alternative motions, and, on June 3, 2005, Judge Goetzke denied the Condominium’s motion. As part of that same Order, a “Judgment by Default” (obviously as to liability only, notwithstanding the grandiose sweep of that label) was entered against the Condominium, and the court further ordered “that the above-captioned case shall be scheduled for a hearing on damages only before any judge.” Four days later, on June 10, 2005, the Condominium filed its notice of appeal. This appeal was taken before the hearing on damages ordered by Judge Goetzke could even be scheduled, let alone conducted.

This ostensible appeal is, therefore, from an interlocutory order, not yet ripe lor appellate review. Niemeyer and Schuett, Maryland Rules Commentary, Rule 2-613, p. 474, points out that a default judgment is not appealable until the question of “relief is adjudicated” and made part of the final judgment.

No order or proceeding under this rule is appealable until entry of judgment. The order for default is not a judgment and is not appealable. It is a determination of liability. Only when the relief is adjudicated and entered as a judgment does any aspect of the proceeding become appeal-able.

The Court of Appeals made this clear in Adams v. Mallory, 308 Md. 453, 460, 520 A.2d 371 (1987).

Ordinarily, the court will have to determine the relief to be awarded against the defaulting party before there is a final judgment on the claim involved in the default. Rule 2-613(e) makes this clear by providing that “[i]f, in order to enable the court to enter judgment, it is necessary to take an account or to determine the amount of damages or to establish the truth of any averment by evidence or to make *380 an investigation of any matter, the court may ... conduct hearings [.]”

In O’Connor v. Moten, 307 Md. 644, 516 A.2d 593 (1986), Judge Adkins explained the significance of the “comprehensive revision of the Maryland Rules” that occurred on July 1, 1984, as those changes impacted on the appealability of a default judgment. “1984.” There are Orwellian echoes in the changes in our perception which that year portended. Things that had once seemed final are no longer so.

Under the earlier rule and pursuant to the case of Himes v. Day, 254 Md. 197, 254 A.2d 181 (1969), a default judgment establishing liability alone could be immediately appealed and a later appeal could also be taken once damages had been awarded. Judge Adkins pointed out how the new (post 1984) rules now require a single appeal after the question of relief has been adjudicated. Himes v. Day has been consigned to 1984’s “memory hole.”

Himes created a substantial piecemeal appeal problem. An appeal on the issue of liability had to be taken after the initial entry of default judgment; a second appeal could be taken on the issue of damages after a later judgment had been entered as to them. Under the present rules, that problem no longer exists, at least when a default judgment is entered following a defendant’s failure to plead. Rule 2-613(a) calls for the entry of an order of default as the initial step towards entry of default judgment. This order is a determination of liability but is not a judgment. The next step,

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

Related

In re: Ferndale Volunteer Fire Dept.
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2026
Maryland Board of Physicians v. Geier
123 A.3d 601 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2015)
Bethesda Title & Escrow, LLC v. Gochnour
14 A.3d 670 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2011)
In Re Cranston
387 B.R. 480 (D. Maryland, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
896 A.2d 1079, 168 Md. App. 376, 2006 Md. App. LEXIS 54, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farragut-village-condominium-association-v-bowling-mdctspecapp-2006.