Opinion ID: 1989497
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Denial of Motion to Reopen Judgment Constituted Abuse of Discretion

Text: A motion to open a default judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b) is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court. [10] When determining whether there has been an abuse of such discretion, this Court considers two questions: a) whether the defaulting party made some showing that, if relief were granted, the outcome of the action might be different from what it would be if the default judgment were allowed to stand; and b) whether substantial prejudice would be caused to the nondefaulting party by granting the motion. [11] Family Court Civil Rule 60(b) is accorded a liberal construction because of the underlying policy favoring a hearing on the merits rather than the entry of a default judgment. [12] We find that the Family Court also abused its discretion by denying Father's motion to reopen the judgment. There was clearly a sufficient showing by Father that a hearing on the merits might have yielded a different result. There was also no indication that Mother would suffer any prejudice if the judgment were reopened. Given the documentation in the record concerning Mother's past mental health problems, the significant medical problems of the parties' Down's syndrome child, as well as Father's representation, which Mother did not dispute, that he had arrived for the hearing only several minutes late, it was a clear abuse of discretion for the Family Court to refuse to reopen the judgment for a hearing on the merits of Mother's motion. [13]