Default Judgment
A default judgment is what can happen when a defendant simply does not respond.
18. Default Judgment
If a defendant does not file an answer or pre-answer motion within the required time, the plaintiff may move for a default judgment. Rule 55.
- Failure to respond timely to a [legally sufficient] complaint means that a judgment may be entered against the defendant without any exploration of the merits of the claim.
- A default judgment constitutes a judgment on the merits that will support claim preclusion.
- [A defendant may avoid a default judgment and obtain additional time to respond to the complaint by showing good cause or excusable neglect for their delay.]
- In determining the remedy pursuant to a default judgment, courts may engage in fact-finding to establish the amount of damages or the truth of factual allegations.
A default judgment can be entered when a defendant fails to file an answer or pre-answer motion within the required time, letting judgment enter without any exploration of the merits. The silence concedes liability on a legally sufficient complaint, but the remedy is not automatic, and the defendant has an escape valve.
The rule has a clear trigger. If the defendant fails to file an answer or a pre-answer motion within the time the rules require, the plaintiff may move for a default judgment. Because the defendant never responded, a judgment may be entered without any exploration of the merits of the claim. The defendant's silence, in effect, concedes the well-pleaded allegations of liability.
- 1A default judgment is a judgment on the merits that will support claim preclusion, so it can bar a later suit on the same claim just like a fully litigated judgment.
- 2Even though liability is conceded by the default, the remedy is not automatic. When the court determines the remedy, it may engage in fact-finding to establish the amount of damages or the truth of factual allegations, so the court can hold a hearing to pin down how much is owed even though the defendant defaulted.
Finally, the door is not necessarily closed on the defendant. A defendant may avoid a default judgment and obtain more time to respond by showing good cause or excusable neglect for the delay. That is the escape valve: a defendant who can explain the late response in those terms may be allowed back in to defend.
The complaint still has to be legally sufficient. A default does not save a complaint that states no valid claim. The plaintiff wins on a default because the allegations are taken as established, not because any complaint automatically prevails.
"Silence concedes liability, but not the dollar amount."
A default judgment follows when the defendant misses the deadline to answer or file a pre-answer motion.
Liability is entered with no exploration of the merits, but the complaint must still be legally sufficient.
Two consequences: it is a merits judgment that supports claim preclusion, and the court may hold fact-finding to set the damages or verify factual allegations.
The escape valve: a defendant who shows good cause or excusable neglect can get more time and avoid the default.
A contractor is properly served with a legally sufficient complaint by a property owner and is given the required time to respond. The contractor files nothing, no answer and no pre-answer motion, and the time runs out. The owner moves for a default judgment. The complaint pleads liability clearly but leaves the precise amount of damages open.
The court may enter a default judgment, then hold a hearing to set the damages. Now change one fact: suppose the contractor, shortly after the deadline, shows the court a documented hospitalization that explains the missed deadline. By showing good cause or excusable neglect, the contractor may avoid the default and obtain additional time to respond.
An option says a default judgment is not on the merits, cannot support claim preclusion, or that a defense alone undoes the default.
A default judgment is a judgment on the merits that supports claim preclusion; to reopen, the defendant must show good cause or excusable neglect for the delay, not just a defense.An option fixes the remedy automatically the moment the defendant defaults, with no inquiry into the amount.
Liability follows from the default, but the court may engage in fact-finding to establish the amount of damages or the truth of factual allegations.An absolute option saying any failure to respond yields a default judgment regardless of the complaint's contents.
The default presupposes a legally sufficient complaint; an insufficient complaint does not yield a valid default no matter the silence.A choice resting on a true but immaterial fact, such as that service occurred or that the defendant has a strong defense, to avoid the default.
The route to avoiding a default is a showing of good cause or excusable neglect for the delay; service and the mere existence of a defense do not control.the stem hands you a defendant who was served and then did nothing, missing the deadline to file an answer or a pre-answer motion, and a plaintiff moving on that silence.
The instant you see a missed response deadline, run the default check: the plaintiff may move for a default judgment, liability is entered without exploring the merits, and the complaint must still be legally sufficient.
Then watch two follow-ups.
On the remedy, ask whether the court may hold fact-finding to set damages rather than treating the amount as automatic.
On the back end, the default is a merits judgment that supports claim preclusion.
And if the defendant offers an explanation for the delay, ask whether it amounts to good cause or excusable neglect, the route to avoiding the default.
A landlord was properly served with a legally sufficient complaint by a former tenant and was given the time the rules require to respond. The landlord filed neither an answer nor any pre-answer motion, and the period to respond expired with nothing on file. The tenant then asked the court to enter judgment based on the landlord's failure to respond.
On what basis may the court enter judgment against the landlord?
A supplier obtained a default judgment against a retailer that had failed to respond to a legally sufficient complaint arising from a single shipment of goods. Later, the supplier filed a brand-new lawsuit against the same retailer asserting the identical claim from the same shipment, hoping for a larger award. The retailer argued that the earlier default judgment blocked the new suit.
Is the default judgment capable of supporting claim preclusion against the new suit?
A wholesaler defaulted by filing nothing in response to a legally sufficient complaint from a distributor. The complaint clearly pleaded the wholesaler's liability but stated that the exact amount of damages remained to be determined. After the defendant's time to respond expired, the distributor asked the court to enter a default judgment and also to fix the amount the wholesaler owed.
How may the court determine the amount of damages on the default judgment?
A homeowner was served with a complaint from a contractor but missed the deadline to respond after a sudden, documented hospitalization left the homeowner unable to act in time. Shortly after recovering, and before any default judgment was entered, the homeowner asked the court for additional time to respond, explaining the hospitalization as the reason for the delay.
On what showing may the homeowner avoid a default judgment and obtain additional time to respond?
A plaintiff filed a complaint that, on its face, identified no recognized legal duty and stated no valid claim against a defendant. The defendant nonetheless failed to file an answer or any pre-answer motion within the required time. The plaintiff moved for a default judgment, arguing that the failure to respond alone entitled the plaintiff to judgment no matter what the complaint said.
Is the plaintiff entitled to a default judgment on these facts?