Firemen's Ins. Co. of Washington, D.C. v. Belts

Decision Date07 February 1983
Docket NumberNo. 81-1619.,81-1619.
Citation455 A.2d 908
PartiesFIREMEN'S INSURANCE COMPANY OF WASHINGTON, D.C., Appellant, v. James BELTS, Appellee.
CourtD.C. Court of Appeals

George H. Eggers, Silver Spring, Md., on brief, for appellant.

Robert A. Johnson, Washington, D.C., on brief, for appellee.

Before KELLY and TERRY, Associate Judges, and GALLAGHER, Associate Judge, Retired.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant insurance company sued appellee in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia for damages to its subrogors' property caused by fire. It served appellee pursuant to Super.Ct.Civ.R. 4(d)(1).1 The Special Process Server's affidavit showed service upon one Dorothy Belts at 1063 44th Street, N.E., Apt. B, "a person of suitable age and discretion then residing therein, in accordance with Rule 4(D) of this Court."2 When appellee failed to answer the complaint, appellant sought and obtained an entry of default. Appellant then filed for judgment and sent notice to appellee pursuant to Super.Ct.Civ.R. 55-11(a); obtained a default judgment, a copy of which was mailed to appellee; and subpoenaed appellee for oral examination. Appellee's wife obtained one continuance of the oral examination and appellee obtained another. Appellee subsequently filed a motion to set aside the judgment and set the case for trial on the ground of lack of service of process.3 The court granted his motion. Appellant now appeals the trial court's order.

At the motions hearing, appellee testified that he and his wife Dorothy had lived at the address and in the apartment shown on the affidavit for seventeen years. Dorothy could read, he said, but he could not. He denied receipt of any court papers. Appellant presented no testimony at the hearing — it relied upon the process server's affidavit. In granting appellee's motion, the court reasoned, "[H]ow do we know that he got the right Dorothy Belts?"

The grant or denial of a motion to set aside a default judgment is committed to the sound discretion of the trial court. Firestone v. Harris, 414 A.2d 526, 528 (D.C. App.1980); Jones v. Hunt, 298 A.2d 220, 221-22 (D.C.App.1972). In exercising its discretion, the trial court must choose "what is right and equitable under the circumstances and the law" and state the reasons which support its conclusion. Johnson v. United States, 398 A.2d 354, 361-64 (D.C. App.1979).

We have previously held that the return of service by a process server may be impeached only by strong and convincing evidence, Castro v. Universal Acceptance Corp., 200 A.2d 202 (D.C.App.1964); Heaney v. Liss, 194 A.2d 668 (D.C.App.1963); Tate v. Kelley, 129 A.2d 855 (D.C.Mun.App. 1957), and cannot be held ineffective solely on the ground that court papers were not delivered to a defendant. Day v. United Securities Corp., 272 A.2d 448 (D.C.App. 1970).

In Castro v. Universal Acceptance Corp., supra, we affirmed the trial court's decision that the defendant's affidavit alone, in the absence of corroborating witnesses, was not sufficient to rebut the presumption of verity attached to the marshal's return of process. The defendant in Castro had moved in the trial court to set aside the default judgment against her. In the affidavit she submitted, the defendant claimed that she had never resided at the address shown on the United States Marshal's return. However, other evidence in the record revealed that the defendant had signed the lease for the apartment shown on the return and that her minor son had occupied that same apartment throughout the year in question.

Here the affidavit of the process server was contradicted only by testimony in direct examination:

Q. Did you get any service? Some court papers? Were court papers served on you on or about November 1979?

A. No.

and testimony in cross-examination:

Q. And as I understand your testimony, that these papers were not served on you? A. No, sir. No more than the papers that tell me to come down here and my wife come down here and say I have to come down here, you know, at least a couple weeks.

Appellee did not testify that his wife Dorothy had not been served and his wife never testified. Hence, the evidence presented was neither strong nor convincing enough to impeach the presumption of truth attached to the statements in the process server's...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Goldschmidt v. Paley Rothman Goldstein, 03-CV-1367.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Columbia District
    • November 8, 2007
    ...under the circumstances and the law' and state the reasons which support its conclusion." Firemen's Ins. Co. of Washington, D.C. v. Belts, 455 A.2d 908, 909 (D.C.1983) (quoting Johnson v. United States, 398 A.2d 354, 361 (D.C.1979)); see Moorehead v. District of Columbia, 747 A.2d 138, 157-......
  • Alexander v. Polinger Co., 84-825.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Columbia District
    • August 1, 1985
    ...in the process servers' returns, clear and convincing proof is required to rebut the presumption of their verity. Fireman's Insurance Co. v. Belts, 455 A.2d 908, 909 (D.C.1983); Tate v. Kelley, 129 A.2d 855, 856 (D.C.1957); accord Castro v. Universal Acceptance Corp., 200 A.2d 202, 203 (D.C......
  • Arthur v. District of Columbia
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Columbia District
    • September 9, 2004
    ...discretion of the trial court. See Rubin v. Lee, 577 A.2d 1158, 1160 (D.C.1990) (citing Firemen's Ins. Co. of Washington, D.C. v. Belts, 455 A.2d 908, 909 (D.C.1983)); see also Restaurant Equip. & Supply Depot, Inc., supra, 852 A.2d at 956. "In exercising its discretion, the trial court mus......
  • Miranda v. Contreras, 98-CV-1160.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Columbia District
    • May 18, 2000
    ...right and equitable under the circumstances and the law and state the reasons which support its conclusion." Firemen's Ins. Co. v. Belts, 455 A.2d 908, 909 (D.C.1983) (per curiam) (internal quotation A. Rule 60(b)(6) Superior Court Civil Rule 60(b) provides that "the Court may relieve a par......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT