Social Accounts Sprite

Default Judgment: Lessons from Eichenbaum v. Eichenbaum

By Snyder & Sarno on April 16, 2015


A court may enter a default judgment under Rule 4:43-1 when one party fails to participate in court proceedings.  In the recent unpublished New Jersey Appellate Division case of Eichenbaum v. Eichenbaum, the court addressed the entry of default in a matrimonial matter.  

In Eichenbaum v. Eichenbaum, after a few years of litigation, the parties’ case was set for trial.  At trial, it was clear that Defendant, who proceeded without a lawyer, had failed to provide Plaintiff with a significantly large number of documents during discovery that he sought to rely on at trial.  The trial judge ordered that Defendant pay Plaintiff’s attorney $50,000 to allow her to review all of the documents that he had previously failed to provide to her.  The trial judge also adjourned the trial. 

When the parties returned to court, Defendant had failed to pay the $50,000 in attorney’s fees.  Thus, the trial judge proceeded to a default hearing where the Defendant was permitted minimal participation.  The judge ultimately decided that Plaintiff would receive sole custody of the children, alimony, and child support and that Defendant would pay attorney’s fees of $70,000. 

On appeal, the New Jersey Appellate Division reversed the trial court’s decision.  Rather, the Appellate Division found that the trial court should not have converted the trial into a default hearing.  The court acknowledged the fact that a default judgment should only be entered in narrow circumstances, particularly where a party fails to appear or defend his or her case. 

The court also noted that it was not appropriate for the court to enter a default judgment when Defendant failed to pay attorney’s fees of $50,000 because the court did not explore lesser sanctions considering Defendant’s claim that he could not pay.  Even if the trial court may have thought Defendant was lying about his ability to pay, it never inquired further into the circumstances to determine whether he could pay or not.      

Ultimately, this case highlights the importance of obtaining an attorney in a divorce case, especially where a divorce is so contentious that it leads to trial.  If you are currently going through a divorce call the experienced attorneys at Snyder & Sarno, LLC at (973) 274-5200.  

Related to This

desktop-only

Message Us

"I was involved in a VERY complicated and tumultuous child custody, divorce, domestic violence case for two full years. I was fortunate enough to be represented by one of the top matrimonial teams in the state of NJ, and the outcome in my case exceeded my every expectation." - Former Client

"Paul personally stood by my side and represented me throughout my injury case. Whether it was business at hand, advice, or a late night phone call to help me understand what was going on; he never took a step back towards helping me. I knew that I could call on him at any time . My case was very successful and I attribute that to Paul's dedication . He even came to me during a snow storm when I could not make it to his office. I certainly would recommend him to anyone." - Former Client

X CLOSE

Bergen County Office

401 Hackensack Ave
Ste 706
Hackensack, NJ 07601

Open Today 8:30am - 5:30pm

Essex County Office

425 Eagle Rock Ave
Ste 202
Roseland, NJ 07068

Open Today 8:30am - 5:30pm

Somerset County Office

440 Route 22 E
Ste 170
Bridgewater, NJ 08807

Open Today 8:30am - 5:30pm

X CLOSE

Message Us

X CLOSE

X CLOSE

Popular Tags