Knight v. Kenilworth Ins. Co.

Decision Date15 November 1971
Docket NumberGen. No. 71--62
Citation2 Ill.App.3d 493,275 N.E.2d 470
PartiesRodney L. KNIGHT and Ronald Knight by next friend Rodney Knight, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. KENILWORTH INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant.
CourtUnited States Appellate Court of Illinois

Klockau, McCarthy, Schubert, Lousberg & Ellison, Rock Island, for defendant-appellant.

Howard Prestwich, Freeport, for plaintiffs-appellees.

THOMAS J. MORAN, Presiding Justice.

Defendant appeals from a denial of his motion to vacate a default judgment entered in favor of the plaintiffs, claiming that the refusal of the trial court to set aside such judgment was unjust, unreasonable and oppressive.

Plaintiffs were insured by the defendant whose policy contained an uninsured motorist clause. This clause was the basis of a small claim suit, instituted by the plaintiffs against the defendant on December 10, 1970. Summons was issued, setting forth the return date as January 12, 1971, and served upon the defendant on January 7, 1971. The defendant failed to appear or plead by the return date and on January 19, 1971, a default order was entered, proofs were heard and a judgment in the sum of $920.70 plus costs of $17.16 was entered.

Three days later (January 22, 1971), defendant's attorney filed a motion supported by affidavit to set aside the default. The affidavit related that at the time the case file was forwarded to defense counsel, he was engaged in trial in Des Moines, Iowa, and that, through inadvertence, he failed to notice the date of appearance. The motion alleged that the defendant had a meritorious defense. Filed on the same date was a motion to dismiss plaintiffs' complaint based upon certain provisions contained within the policy.

Upon hearing, the trial court denied the motion to vacate its former judgment and this appeal followed. During the pendency of the appeal, plaintiffs filed a motion for attorney fees as provided by statute, Ill.Rev.Stat.1969, Ch. 73, Sec. 767, and the motion was taken with the case.

Early in the common law of Illinois, it was established that the setting aside of a default judgment within term time (30 days) is generally a discretionary matter for the trial court; however, the exercise of that discretion is subject to review Scales et al. v. Labar et al., 51 Ill. 232 (1869). During this same period, it was further established that trial courts should be liberal in setting aside default orders within term time when it appears that justice will be promoted. Mason v. McNamara et al., 57 Ill. 274, 277 (1870). Prior to 1933, it was necessary that a meritorious defense and good excuse be shown. Today these are not necessary but are factors, as is hardship suffered by the plaintiff, which the court may take into account in resolving the more basic determination of dispensing justice between the parties. Widicus v. Southwestern Elec. Cooperative, 26 Ill.App.2d 102, 108--109, 167 N.E.2d 799 (1960).

The reviewing court need not determine, as a matter of law, that the trial court abused its discretion, but only resolve the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Barker, Matter of, 75--171
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • April 19, 1976
  • Patrick v. Burgess-Norton Mfg. Co.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • February 14, 1975
    ...of whether justice has been served. Trojan v. Marquette Nat. Bank, 88 Ill.App.2d 428, 438, 232 N.E.2d 160; Knight v. Kenilworth Ins. Co., 2 Ill.App.3d 493, 275 N.E.2d 470. Applying these principles to the facts of this case we are of the opinion that allowing the plaintiff to have his day i......
  • Accurate Home Supply, Inc. v. Malpede
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • June 4, 1973
    ...26 Ill.App.2d 102, 108--111, 167 N.E.2d 799.' Perhaps the most recent case on this subject is Knight v. Kenilworth Ins. Co. (1971), 2 Ill.App.3d 493, at page 495, 275 N.E.2d 470, at page 471, where, in reversing a judgment and remanding the cause with directions to vacate the judgment and t......
  • Satcher v. Inland Real Estate Corp.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • July 18, 1983
    ...import was the question of whether or not the form of defendant's motion was technically complete. (See Knight v. Kenilworth Ins. Co. (2nd Dist.1971), 2 Ill.App.3d 493, 275 N.E.2d 470 (defendant's motion to vacate default judgment alleged a meritorious defense and appellate court, without a......
  • 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