Quaker Furniture House, Inc. v. Ball

228 S.E.2d 475, 31 N.C. App. 140, 1976 N.C. App. LEXIS 1925
Court of Appeals of North Carolina·Decided October 6, 1976·No. 7625SC347·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

HEDRICK, Judge.

Plaintiff assigns as error the order of the trial court setting aside the default judgment. Plaintiff concedes that service of the answer was had upon it within the thirty-day perjod after service of the summons and complaint prescribed by G.S. 1A-1, Rule 12(a) (1), but argues that the portion of G.S. 1A-1, Rule 5(d) which provides, “All pleadings subsequent to the complaint shall be filed with the court,” entitles it to a default judgment since the answer was not filed with the court until some thirty-five days after service of the summons and complaint. We do not agree.

Under G.S. 1A-1, Rule 55 a defendant’s default can be entered only if he “has failed to plead or is otherwise subject to default,” and a default judgment can be entered by the clerk only if the defendant has failed “to appear.” We hold that service of the answer is both a “pleading” and an “appearance” for the purpose of Rule 55.

G.S. 1A-1, Rule 12(a) (1) provides in part: “[A] defendant shall serve his answer within 30 days after service of the summons and complaint upon him.” (Emphasis added.) Rule 12(a)(1) requires only that the defendant serve his answer within thirty days. There is nothing in Rule 5(d) that requires the defendant to file his answer with the court within thirty days as well. Rule 5(d) does not provide any period in which the filing must take place.

Although the trial court has discretion under certain circumstances to set aside an entry of default under G.S. 1A-1, Rule 55(c) and a default judgment under G.S. 1A-1, Rule 60(b), we are of the opinion that the trial court in setting aside the default judgment correctly concluded that since the defendants had served their answer on the plaintiff within thirty days after they had been served with the summons and *142 complaint, the judgment had been “entered inadvertently and is void and of no legal effect.” G.S. 1A-1, Rule 60(b) (4).

The order appealed from is

Affirmed.

Judges Morris and Arnold concur.

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

Quaker Furniture House, Inc. v. Ball, 228 S.E.2d 475, 31 N.C. App. 140, 1976 N.C. App. LEXIS 1925 (N.C. Ct. App. 1976).

228 S.E.2d 475 (Quaker Furniture House, Inc. v. Ball) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Down East Homes of Beulaville, Inc. v. Washington
Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2026
Robinson v. GGNSC Holdings, LLC
823 S.E.2d 171 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2019)
Commonwealth v. Stenning
36 Va. Cir. 54 (Loudoun County Circuit Court, 1995)
Hyder v. Dergance
332 S.E.2d 713 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1985)
Tarr v. SUPERIOR COURT IN & FOR PIMA COUNTY
690 P.2d 68 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1984)
Anderson v. Wilson
680 P.2d 200 (Court of Appeals of Arizona, 1984)
Peebles v. Moore
269 S.E.2d 694 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1980)