Harrold v. Kaufman
This text of 430 A.2d 423 (Harrold v. Kaufman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
OPINION
This is an appeal by the defendant, Martha Kaufman, from an order denying her motion, pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure, to vacate a default judgment entered against her in the Superior Court.
On February 22, 1978, Deborah A. Har-rold instituted in the Superior Court this civil action against defendant, seeking to recover for damages she sustained as a result of a motor-vehicle collision with defendant. A default was entered against defendant on June 14,1978, and a judgment for $8,079 was subsequently entered against her.
[424]*424On March 2, 1979, defendant filed a motion to vacate the default judgment in which she asserted the provisions of Super.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(1) and (6)1 as grounds for relief. A Superior Court justice conducted an in-chambers hearing on defendant’s motion; however, no stenographic record of that hearing was made. After hearing arguments of counsel, the trial justice denied defendant’s motion.
In this appeal, the defendant contends that the trial justice abused his discretion in denying her motion. In the absence of a transcript or other adequate record 2 of the hearing below, however, we are unable to conduct a meaningful review of the trial justice’s decision or to pass upon the issue raised by the defendant. See White v. LeClerc, R.I., 422 A.2d 1256, 1257 (1980); Citizens for Preservation of Waterman Lake v. Davis, R.I., 381 A.2d 1365, 1366 (1978). Under the circumstances, we must remand the case to the Superior Court where a hearing will be held on the defendant’s motion to vacate the default judgment entered, at which time the parties may set forth such affidavits and evidence as may be considered relevant.
Accordingly, the order appealed from is vacated, and the case is remanded to the Superior Court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
430 A.2d 423, 1981 R.I. LEXIS 1164, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harrold-v-kaufman-ri-1981.