Nora Williams v. Contemporary Services Corporation

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedNovember 13, 2013
DocketA13A1464
StatusPublished

This text of Nora Williams v. Contemporary Services Corporation (Nora Williams v. Contemporary Services Corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Nora Williams v. Contemporary Services Corporation, (Ga. Ct. App. 2013).

Opinion

FIRST DIVISION PHIPPS, C. J., ELLINGTON, P. J., and BRANCH, J.

NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk’s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed. http://www.gaappeals.us/rules/

November 13, 2013

In the Court of Appeals of Georgia A13A1464. WILLIAMS v. CONTEMPORARY SERVICES CORPORATION et al.

B RANCH, Judge.

Nora Williams appeals the trial court’s decisions to set aside a default judgment

and to open default in favor of Contemporary Services Corporation

(“Contemporary”). For the reasons stated below, we reverse.

The record shows that Williams filed her complaint for damages on March 3,

2010; that Williams caused Contemporary’s registered agent in Georgia to be served

on March 11, 2010; that on June 3, 2010, Williams filed proof of service of process;

and that as of June 30, 2010, Contemporary had failed to answer. On June 30, 2010,

the trial court issued a rule nisi for a hearing to be held on August 13, 2010, and on that day the trial court held a hearing and a bench trial on damages, following which

it entered a judgment by default in the amount of $85,000 plus interest. 1

On October 20, 2010, Contemporary filed a motion to set aside the judgment

and to open default, as well as a certificate of counsel, supporting affidavits, and a

proposed answer. Eight months later, on June 21, 2011, the trial court granted

Contemporary’s motion, set aside the default judgment, and opened default. On June

27, 2011, Contemporary filed its answer and paid the costs to open default. Williams

thereafter moved for reconsideration, but the court denied the motion.

The case proceeded to a bench trial. Following opening arguments, Williams

rested her case without introducing evidence. Contemporary moved for a judgment

on the grounds that W illiams failed to introduce any evidence and failed to prosecute

the case. The trial court directed a verdict in favor of Contemporary and subsequently

entered a final judgment in favor of Contemporary on August 22, 2012. Williams filed

a notice of appeal from this judgment on August 30, 2012.

1. Williams contends the trial court erred by setting aside the default judgment.

“A trial court’s decision regarding a motion to set aside a judgment will not be

1 The judgment explains that at the hearing, the court heard evidence regarding Williams’s unliquidated damages.

2 reversed absent a showing of manifest abuse of discretion.” (Citation omitted.) Kent

v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 233 Ga. App. 564, 566 (2) (504 SE2d 710) (1998).

Outside of the term of court in which a judgment has been entered,2 it may be

set aside only for one of three reasons:

(1) Lack of jurisdiction over the person or the subject matter; (2) Fraud, accident, or mistake or the acts of the adverse party unmixed with the negligence or fault of the movant; or (3) A nonamendable defect which appears upon the face of the record or pleadings.

OCGA § 9-11-60 (d); The Pantry v. Harris, 271 Ga. App. 346, 347 (2) (609 SE2d

692) (2005) (“the first and essential step against any final judgment, including a

default judgment, is a motion to set aside the judgment under OCGA § 9-11-60 (d)”).

In this case, the trial court set aside the default judgment on the ground that a

nonamendable defect appeared on the face of the record in that “[h]aving reviewed the

record, it appears that no Certificate of Default was ever filed by Plaintiff” in

2 See Bridgestone/Firestone North American Tire v. Jenkins, 261 Ga. App. 20, 21 (2) (582 SE2d 9) (2003) (“[A] court may exercise its discretion for meritorious reasons to set aside a judgment within the same term of court. . . . Once that term of court has ended, however, a judgment may only be set aside under the procedures in OCGA § 9-11-60 (d).”) (citations omitted). Here, Contemporary filed its motion to set aside the judgment outside of the term in which the default judgment was entered.

3 compliance with Uniform Superior Court Rule (“USCR”) 15.3 Williams contends this

ruling was error. We agree.4

In attempting to secure a default judgment, Williams was required by USCR 15

to “certify to the court” in writing two items of information: the date and type of

service effected on Contemporary and that the court records show no defensive

pleading had been filed. The rule provides that the certificate “must be attached to the

proposed default judgment when presented to the judge for signature.” The plain terms

3 The party seeking entry of a default judgment in any action shall certify to the court the date and type of service effected and that no defensive pleading has been filed by the defendant as shown by court records. This certificate shall be in writing and must be attached to the proposed default judgment when presented to the judge for signature.

Uniform Superior Court Rule 15. 4 In the trial court, Contemporary moved to set aside the judgment on the second and third bases of OCGA § 9-11-60 (d): fraud/accident/mistake; and nonamendable defect in the record. Contemporary never argued that the trial court lacked jurisdiction over Contemporary. On appeal, Contemporary has abandoned its argument based on OCGA § 9-11-60 (d) (2) (fraud/accident/mistake). Thus the only issue on appeal regarding the trial court’s decision to set aside the default judgment is whether there was a nonamendable defect in the record. And “[t]he alleged nonamendable defect must be apparent from the face of the record in the absence of the additional evidence.” (Citation omitted.) Hardeman v. Roberts, 214 Ga. App. 484, 485 (448 SE2d 254) (1994).

4 of the rule show that the certificate is intended to assure the judge who has received

a proposed default judgment that the defendant was in fact served and in fact failed

to answer, information already available in the record.5 In fact, in the Rule Nisi issued

by the trial court, the judge “noted” that service had been perfected but that no answer

had been filed. Based on the apparent purpose of Rule 15 and the fact that the same

information required in the Rule 15 certificate can be found in the record, we conclude

that the failure to file a Rule 15 certificate is not a nonamendable defect in the record

sufficient to authorize the trial court to set aside a default judgment under OCGA §

9-11-60 (d).6 Cf. Hardeman, 214 Ga. App. at 485 (failure to notify trial court pursuant

to USCR 4.8 that action was a renewed action was not a nonamendable defect

appearing on the face of the record under OCGA § 9-11-60 (d) (3)) (physical

precedent only). Compare SRM Realty Servs. Group v. Capital Flooring Enterprises,

274 Ga. App. 595, 604-605 (3) (617 SE2d 581) (2005) (holding that Rule 15

5 See OCGA § 9-11-4

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

Related

Bridgestone/Firestone North American Tire, LLC v. Jenkins
582 S.E.2d 9 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2003)
H.N. Real Estate Grour LLC v. Dixon
679 S.E.2d 130 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2009)
The Pantry, Inc. v. Harris
609 S.E.2d 692 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2005)
Russell v. Russell
356 S.E.2d 884 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1987)
Kent v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
504 S.E.2d 710 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1998)
SRM Realty Services Group, LLC v. Capital Flooring Enterprises, Inc.
617 S.E.2d 581 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2005)
Wyse v. Potamkin Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.
374 S.E.2d 785 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1988)
Hardeman v. Roberts
448 S.E.2d 254 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1994)
Lewis v. Waller
637 S.E.2d 505 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Nora Williams v. Contemporary Services Corporation, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nora-williams-v-contemporary-services-corporation-gactapp-2013.