|
When a party files a responsive pleading challenging a motion to confirm an arbitration award but fails to appear at the related hearing, the resulting confirmation is not a “default judgment” that accords the challenging party a more expansive opportunity to reopen or appeal that confirmation, according to a Missouri appellate court.
In MBNA Am. Bank v. Montgomery, No. 28706, 2008 WL 4491656 ( Mo. Ct. App. Oct. 8, 2008), MBNA demanded arbitration of a credit card dispute with Montgomery, which resulted in an award in MBNA’s favor. MBNA moved to confirm the award. Montgomery moved to dismiss, vacate the award, and stay the proceedings. On August 5, 2005, the trial court conducted a hearing. Montgomery did not attend. The trial court confirmed the award.
After MBNA garnished his bank account to collect on the award, Montgomery filed a motion to “Vacate Default Judgment.” At a November 16, 2006 hearing, the trial court rejected Montgomery’s argument that the August 5, 2005 dispensation was a “default judgment,” noting that Montgomery did not appear at the hearing, but did plead in response to MBNA’s motion to confirm. Accordingly, the trial court determined that Montgomery’s failure to move to vacate, reopen, correct, amend, or modify the judgment within 30 days precluded consideration of Montgomery’s renewed motion to vacate. Mo. Ct. R. 75.01.
On appeal, the Court determined that the trial court had correctly characterized the August 5, 2005 judgment, holding that it was not a “default judgment” because Montgomery filed a responsive pleading. Because it was not a default judgment, the Court agreed that Montgomery’s appeal was governed by R. 75.01, and his failure to move to vacate, reopen, correct, amend, or modify that judgment within 30 days of August 5, 2005 rendered that judgment final.
Once the judgment was final, the Court noted that Montgomery’s failure to file a notice of appeal within ten days and his failure to file a late notice of appeal within six months rendered the judgment final and non-appealable. Mo. Ct. R. 81.07(a). Accordingly, the Court dismissed Montgomery’s appeal.
Subscribe to a free weekly update on ADR case law and
legislation
|