Husband Who Abused Drugs During Marriage Could Set Aside Default Judgment

The husband and wife in this Sevier County, Tennessee, case were married in 2000 and had a child who was born in 2007.  The wife filed for divorce in 2021.  The husband was served, but failed to file an answer.  The wife filed for default judgment, and the husband did not appear at the hearing.  The trial court entered a default judgment, with included a permanent parenting plan.  The wife as awarded the marital home and vehicle.  She was also granted 365 days per year of parenting time.  The husband, who had dealt with drug addiction over the course of the marriage, was restricted to supervised visitation.  He was also ordered to pay $615 per month child support.

Several months later, the husband made a motion to set aside the default judgment.  He acknowledged receiving the complaint, but stated that he did not receive notice of the default hearing.

The trial court, Judge Rex H. Ogle, granted the husband’s motion.  It held that it was unclear as to whether the defendant received notice of the default, but that the policy of the law was to “give everybody as we possibly can a fair shot at being heard in a trial.”   The wife then appealed to the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

The appeals court first noted that the standard of review is de novo, but with a presumption of correctness of factual findings of the trial court.  It also noted that a party seeking relief from a final judgment bears the burden of proof.

Since the trial court’s ruling was based in part upon the husband’s drug use, the wife argued that his choice to take drugs could not serve as grounds for excusable neglect.  She also argued that he made no effort to update his address, and that he had no meritorious defense on the merits.

On the issue of the husband’s willfulness, the appeals court pointed out that there was evidence in the record supporting the lower court’s finding.  Therefore, it did have an evidentiary basis. 

As for the husband having a meritorious defense, the appeals court conceded that the defense was “rather generic.”  But still, it was not hard to discern what his objection was.  It held that there was at least a reasonable possibility that the husband would fare better than he did, had he been allowed to present a defense.

After reviewing all of the evidence, the appeals court concluded that the evidence did not preponderate against the lower court’s ruling.  For that reason, it affirmed the lower court’s decision and remanded the case.  It also assessed the costs of appeal against the wife.

No. E2023-00484-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. July 11, 2024).

See original opinion for exact language.  Legal citations omitted.

To learn more, see The Tennessee Divorce Process: How Divorces Work Start to Finish.