Opinion ID: 2169710
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Motion for Entry of Default

Text: Urena next contends that a Superior Court justice improperly denied his motion to enter default. He says that this motion should have been granted because Theta filed its answer to the complaint seventeen days after the twenty-day period allowed under Rule 12(a). Rule 55(a) of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure governs the entry of defaults, providing as follows: When a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided by these rules and that fact is made to appear by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk shall enter the party's default. (Emphasis added.) Thus, the application of this rule is predicated upon a party's failure to plead or otherwise defend. Here, however, Theta filed its answer to the complaint on December 5, 2001  tardy, but well in advance of Urena's motion for entry of default, which was filed on January 28, 2002. Because Urena's motion was filed after Theta had pleaded and asserted its defense, we hold that his motion for entry of default was properly denied. See Naylor v. Marold, 542 A.2d 662, 664 (R.I.1988) (justice lacked authority to enter default because party's answer to complaint satisfied pleading requirement).