Opinion ID: 1921931
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Prompt Action

Text: Mr. Venison asserts that he acted quickly after learning about the default judgment. In its order the trial court agreed, ruling that Mr. Venison [had] come forward promptly after the entry of the court's order and judgment.... It concluded, however, that Mr. Venison's promptness was the only factor favoring vacatur. Our assessment of the record is not quite as generous. We recognize that the focus of this factor is on the promptness with which the party against whom the default judgment was entered took action to challenge it after learning about it. However, this presupposes that the party was unaware of the proceedings against him up to that point. As we have already pointed out, Mr. Venison has presented no evidence  other than his unsupported claim that the judgment was the first document he received in the case  contesting the process server's affidavit that he was personally served. Since he failed to refute that affidavit, it must be presumed that Mr. Venison did receive personal service, and thus his promptness in coming forward after the judgment was entered carries little or no weight.