Opinion ID: 1934936
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Opportunity to challenge the judgment

Text: Matthew further challenges the judgment on the ground that having entered his appearance prior to judgment he was entitled to be heard. In 1990, M.R.Civ.P. 80(d) read in pertinent part: Even though the defendant does not file an answer, the defendant may, upon entering a written appearance, before judgment, be heard on issues of custody of children, alimony, support, and counsel fees and division of marital property. Maine Rules of Court: State and Federal 1990. The day after the hearing, Matthew filed an appearance and a motion to stay or dismiss the proceedings. The trial court denied the motion and entered the judgment the following day. The Advisory Committee's Notes discussing the 1992 amendment to Rule 80(d) (moving the relevant language to section (f) and providing that the defendant must enter an appearance before the commencement of the trial) advise that Matthew was entitled to be heard. The Advisory Notes read: Rule 80(f) carries forward former Rule 80(d) with language clarifying the procedure in the case of a defendant who does not answer but appears. The intent of the rule is to require a defendant to enter an appearance prior to the commencement of trial if the defendant wishes to participate in the proceeding or to object at hearing. Former Rule 80(d) granted a right to be heard before judgment, which permitted parties failing to answer in accordance with the summons to oppose the judgment after trial but during the appeal period. Advisory Committee's Notes to Amendments Effective February 15, 1992. Me.Rep. 602-617 at XCVI (1992-1993). Both the Notes and the plain language of the 1990 version of the Rule itself teach that Matthew needed only to enter an appearance. He was not compelled to detail those issues on which he wished to be heard. The divorce judgment must be vacated. The entry is: Judgment vacated. Remanded to the Superior Court for remand to the District Court for a consideration of its jurisdiction pursuant to the UCCJA and the PKPA and for rehearing of the divorce complaint. All concurring.