Golmon v. Latham
Decision Date | 01 May 2007 |
Docket Number | No. COA06-471.,COA06-471. |
Citation | 643 S.E.2d 625 |
Court | North Carolina Court of Appeals |
Parties | Glenn K. GOLMON and Inge K. Golmon, Plaintiffs, v. Phillip Paul LATHAM and AAA Moving & Storage, Defendants. |
Steven M. Fisher, Greenville, for plaintiffs-appellees.
Mills & Economos, L.L.P., by Larry C. Economos, Greenville, for defendants-appellants.
Defendants Phillip Paul Latham and AAA Moving & Storage appeal from the superior court's entry of default judgment in favor of plaintiffs Glenn K. Golmon and Inge K. Golmon. Because defendants failed to first seek relief from the default judgment at the trial level, they are precluded from attacking it on appeal. Accordingly, we affirm.
On 25 October 2004, plaintiffs filed a complaint alleging, among other things, that they entered into a contract with defendants for the storage and moving of various household furnishings. Plaintiffs alleged that when the items were returned to plaintiffs several weeks later, numerous items were either missing or damaged. Plaintiffs' complaint sought damages for negligence, breach of contract, and unfair and deceptive trade practices.
Defendants did not answer the complaint or otherwise defend the lawsuit. Plaintiffs moved for entry of default on 26 July 2005, and the Pitt County Clerk of Superior Court entered default pursuant to Rule 55(a) of the Rules of Civil Procedure on the same day. On 7 September 2005, Judge W. Russell Duke, Jr. entered a default judgment against defendants in the amount of $13,606.84, nunc pro tunc 22 August 2005. Defendants appealed from that judgment to this Court.
Defendants argue on appeal that the entry of default by the Clerk of Court and the default judgment entered by the trial court violated defendants' due process rights because defendants were not served with the motion for entry of default, the motion for default judgment, or notice of the hearings on the respective motions. The record, however, indicates that defendants did not move in the trial court to set aside the default judgment pursuant to Rule 55(d) or Rule 60(b) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure.
This Court has previously held, with respect to a default judgment, that "[f]ailure to attack the judgment at the trial court level precludes such an attack on appeal." Univ. of N.C. v. Shoemate, 113 N.C.App. 205, 216, 437 S.E.2d 892, 898, disc. review denied, 336 N.C. 615, 447 S.E.2d 413 (1994). See also Gibby v. Lindsey, 149 N.C.App. 470, 472 n. 1, 560 S.E.2d 589, 591 n. 1 (2002) ( ). The requirement that a party first seek relief from a default judgment in the trial is in accord with the rule followed in the majority of jurisdictions. See, e.g., Consorzio Del Prosciutto Di Parma v. Domain Name Clearing Co., 346 F.3d 1193, 1195 (9th Cir. 2003) ( ); Maust v. Estate of Bair, 859 N.E.2d 779, 783 (Ind.Ct.App.2007) (...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Akshar Distribution Co. v. Smoky's Mart Inc.
...to attack a default judgment at the trial court precludes an attack on the default judgment on appeal. Golmon v. Latham , 183 N.C. App. 150, 151-52, 643 S.E.2d 625, 626 (2007) ; see Collins v. N.C. State Highway & Pub. Works Comm'n , 237 N.C. 277, 284, 74 S.E.2d 709, 715 (1953) ("To set asi......
-
Mkt. Am., Inc. v. Yong Guang Lin
...relief from a default judgment must first move the trial court for relief before appealing to this Court. Golmon v. Latham,183 N.C.App. 150, 151–52, 643 S.E.2d 625, 626 (2007).Here, the trial court entered default judgment on 2 June 2014. Ms. Zhang filed a motion to set aside the entry of d......
-
E.B. Harris, Inc. v. Wiggins, No. COA09-169 (N.C. App. 4/20/2010)
...Designs, Inc., 156 N.C. App. 695, 696, 577 S.E.2d 654, 655 (2003); see also N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-301.1 (2010); Golmon v. Latham, 183 N.C. App. 150, 151, 643 S.E.2d 625, 626 (2007). As provided in N.C.G.S. § 1-301.1, because an appeal from a judgment of the clerk of superior court is to the a......
- State v. Wilson