Default judgment vacated

Listen to this article

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on July 13 vacated a default judgment entered after a party failed to answer an amended complaint.

However, the court did not vacate the judgment because the plaintiff failed to serve the amended complaint on the attorney of record, as required by sec. 801.14(2).

The court did not even address the statute, although it had granted certiorari on that issue.

Instead, it applied a five-factor test, and held that reopening the judgment was equitable under sec. 806.07(1)(h).

Justice Patience Drake Roggensack wrote for the court, “Because of the five interest of justice factors weighing in favor of Zurich; the numerous errors, procedural and otherwise, that were generated in part by plaintiff's counsel and the circuit court personnel who were responsible for listing Ratzel as Zurich's attorney of record into the CCAP system; and our policy disfavoring default judgments, we conclude that Zurich has met its burden of proving that extraordinary circumstances exist justifying vacating the default judgment.”

For the full analysis of this case, see Monday’s edition of the Wisconsin Law Journal.

Case: Miller v. The Hanover Ins. Co., No. 2008AP1494.