General Credit Acceptance Company, LLC, Respondent, vs. Nadine Reese, Appellant.
Decision date: August 28, 2012ED97941
Parties & Roles
- Appellant
- Nadine Reese
- Respondent
- General Credit Acceptance Company, LLC
Judges
- Opinion Author
- GLENN A. NORTON
Disposition
Mixed outcome
- {"type":"affirmed","scope":null}
- {"type":"reversed","scope":null}
Slip Opinion Notice
This archive contains Missouri appellate slip opinions reproduced for research convenience, not the final official reporter version. Official source links remain authoritative where provided. Joseph Ott, Attorney 67889, Ott Law Firm - Constant Victory - Personal Injury and Litigation maintains these public legal archives to support Missouri case research and to help prospective clients connect that research to the firm's courtroom practice.
Syllabus
GENERAL CREDIT ACCEPTANCE ) No. ED97941 COMPANY, LLC, ) ) Respondent, ) Appeal from the Circuit Court ) of St. Louis County vs. ) 11SL-AC27397 ) NADINE REESE, ) Honorable Sandra Farragut-Hemphill ) Appellant. ) Filed: August 28, 2012
OPINION
Nadine Reese appeals the judgment denying her motion to set aside a default judgment in favor of General Credit Acceptance Company, LLC ("General Credit") on its claim for breach of contract. We affirm. I. BACKGROUND General Credit filed a petition alleging that Reese breached a retail installment contract for the purchase of a motor vehicle. Reese was duly served, the matter was assigned to an associate division of the circuit court, and a hearing was scheduled for December 5, 2011, at 9:00 a.m. Reese appeared in court and filed a responsive pleading at 8:50 a.m. on December 5, 2011, but was not present when the case was called. The trial court entered a default judgment in favor of General Credit in the amount of $11,970.32. Reese filed a motion to set aside the default judgment, which was denied by the trial court. Reese appeals.
II. DISCUSSION A. The Trial Court did not Err in Entering Default Judgment in Favor of General Credit Reese's first two points on appeal claim that the trial court erred in entering a default judgment in favor of General Credit. We disagree. Ordinarily a party may not directly appeal the entry of a default judgment. In re C.W., 317 S.W.3d 204, 205 (Mo. App. W.D. 2010). However, an appeal of a default judgment is appropriate where a party, as Reese did here, sought to have the default judgment set aside. Agnello v. Walker, 306 S.W.3d 666, 675 (Mo. App. W.D. 2010). Whether the trial court had the authority to enter a default judgment is a question of law that we review de novo. Id. at 676. RSMo Chapter 517 applies to civil cases, like General Credit's claim for breach of contract, that are filed in the associate division of the circuit court and demand damages not in excess of $25,000. Section 517.011.1(1) RSMo 2000. 1 In such cases, "[a] default judgment may be entered in favor of a party . . . when the opposing party has been duly and timely served with summons and does not appear in court on the return date or subsequent date to which the case has been continued." Section 517.131. In her first point on appeal, Reese claims the trial court erred in entering a default judgment against her because she appeared in court on the date of the summons. Reese argues the entry of a default judgment was not proper under section 517.131 because, although she was not present when the case was called, she did "appear in court on the return date" when she filed her responsive pleading. However, section 517.131 contemplates more than just a requirement that a party appear in court at any point during the date that the cause is scheduled to be called.
1 All further statutory references are to RSMo 2000.
2
Instead, section 517.131 allows a default judgment when a party fails to appear at the scheduled hearing. See State ex rel. Stude v. Jackson, 213 S.W.3d 208, 210 n.1 (Mo. App. E.D. 2007) (stating that it was appropriate for the trial court to enter a default judgment under section 517.131 following the party's "failure to appear at the hearing"). Because Reese failed to appear at the hearing, the trial court did not err in entering a default judgment in favor of General Credit. Point one is denied. In her second point on appeal, Reese claims the trial court erred in entering a default judgment because she contested the case by filing a responsive pleading. Reese is correct that a default judgment is generally improper where a defendant has timely filed an answer. Everest Reinsurance Co. v. Kerr, 253 S.W.3d 100, 104 (Mo. App. W.D. 2008). However, as previously indicated, cases filed in the associate division of the circuit court follow their own statutory rules for the entry of a default judgment. Adams v. Borello, 975 S.W.2d 188, 190 (Mo. App. W.D. 1998). Specifically, under section 517.131, entry of a default judgment is proper where a party fails to appear at the scheduled hearing, regardless of whether that party filed responsive pleadings. Jackson, 213 S.W.3d at 209-10 n.1; see also Adams, 975 S.W.2d at 190. Point two is denied. B. The Trial Court did not Err in Denying Reese's Motion to Set Aside the Default Judgment In her third and final point on appeal, Reese claims the trial court erred in denying her motion to set aside the default judgment because she showed a meritorious defense and good cause by appearing in court and filing an answer. We disagree. We review a trial court's decision denying a motion to set aside a default judgment for an abuse of discretion. Sastry v. Sastry, 302 S.W.3d 264, 266 (Mo. App. E.D. 2010). We afford the
3
trial court narrower discretion in denying a motion to set aside a default judgment than when granting such a motion. Id. A default judgment may be set aside upon a motion stating facts constituting both a meritorious defense and good cause. Missouri Supreme Court Rule 74.05(d) (2012); Dozier v. Dozier, 222 S.W.3d 308, 312 (Mo. App. W.D. 2007). "As such, on appeal of the denial of a motion to set aside a default judgment, if the appellate court finds that the motion failed to state facts constituting either a meritorious defense or good cause, it must affirm." Dozier, 222 S.W.3d at 312. Here, Reese's motion argued only that the trial court's entry of default judgment "must be reversed, regardless of whether the defendant shows good cause and a meritorious defense, if the defendant has filed a timely answer." As previously indicated, section 517.131 contemplates an entry of a default judgment where a party fails to appear at the scheduled hearing, regardless of whether responsive pleadings were filed. Accordingly, Reese's motion to set aside the default judgment failed to state facts constituting both a meritorious defense and good cause. Therefore, the trial court did not err in denying the motion. Point three is denied. III. CONCLUSION The judgment is affirmed.
________________________ GLENN A. NORTON, J.
Clifford H. Ahrens, P.J. and Sherri B. Su llivan, J., concur
4
Authorities Cited
Statutes, rules, and cases referenced in this opinion.
Rules
- Rule 74.05cited
Rule 74.05
Cases
- adams v borello 975 sw2d 188cited
Adams v. Borello, 975 S.W.2d 188
- agnello v walker 306 sw3d 666cited
Agnello v. Walker, 306 S.W.3d 666
- dozier v dozier 222 sw3d 308cited
Dozier v. Dozier, 222 S.W.3d 308
- reinsurance co v kerr 253 sw3d 100cited
Reinsurance Co. v. Kerr, 253 S.W.3d 100
- sastry v sastry 302 sw3d 264cited
Sastry v. Sastry, 302 S.W.3d 264
- see state ex rel stude v jackson 213 sw3d 208cited
See State ex rel. Stude v. Jackson, 213 S.W.3d 208
Related Opinions
Cases sharing legal topics and authorities with this opinion.
The Wanda Myers Living Trust vs. NEA LG LE, et al(2015)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District#WD77385
In the Interest of: B.K.B. vs. Juvenile Officer(2022)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District#WD85225
M.R.R. vs. K.W.C.(2025)
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District#WD87076