ANCHORAGE POYNTE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. VS. Â CHRISTOPHER DI CRISTO(L-1315-13, ATLANTIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-4329-15T4

Christopher and Patricia DiCristo bought a condominium with a boat slip in 2005 and stopped paying association dues after the unit went into foreclosure.
Anchorage Poynte Condominium Association sued in 2013 for unpaid dues, interest, assessments and attorneys' fees; Christopher initially answered pro se; Patricia defaulted.
Plaintiff obtained summary judgment in 2014, but that judgment was vacated because defendants filed a Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition; the bankruptcy was later dismissed and the state court reinstated the complaint.
Plaintiff refiled for summary judgment and, after multiple hearings (defendant given time to retain counsel and later failing to appear), the court entered judgment for plaintiff for $52,456.89 and dismissed defendants' counterclaim for lack of proof.
Christopher moved under Rule 4:50 to vacate the April 4, 2016 judgment and to reinstate his counterclaim; the motion was denied on April 29, 2016. Defendants appealed only the denial of the Rule 4:50 relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court abused its discretion in denying relief under R. 4:50	No grounds shown to vacate; judge acted within discretion	Christopher argued judge should have vacated the judgment and reinstated counterclaim but did not identify a specific R.4:50 ground	No abuse of discretion; denial affirmed
Proper treatment of pro se pleadings	Court may hold pro se to court rules; plaintiff relied on submitted evidence	Christopher argued his pleadings should be held to a less stringent standard	Court accommodated pro se status but refused to excuse compliance with rules; no unfair treatment found
Whether defendants were entitled to a set-off for alleged association breaches (relying on Glen)	No proof of damages; obligations to pay common expenses remain unconditional	Defendants claimed association breach and sought set-off against dues	No evidence of damages; Glen does not relieve obligation to pay; no set-off granted
Whether defendants raised genuine material fact issues / whether counterclaim was sufficiently supported	Plaintiff argued defendants offered only conclusory allegations and failed discovery responses	Defendants claimed factual disputes and defenses that should block summary judgment	Counterclaim dismissed and summary judgment appropriate because defendants failed to produce competent evidentiary material to create a genuine issue of fact

Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (holding pro se pleadings are held to a less stringent standard)
In re Guardianship of J.N.H., 172 N.J. 440 (trial court's decision on R.4:50 relief reviewed for abuse of discretion)
Housing Auth. of Morristown v. Little, 135 N.J. 274 (discussing equitable discretion in post-judgment relief)
Fusco v. Bd. of Educ., 349 N.J. Super. 455 (appeal limited to judgments/orders listed in notice of appeal)
Rubin v. Rubin, 188 N.J. Super. 155 (pro se litigants must adhere to court rules)
The Glen, Section I Condo. Ass'n v. June, 344 N.J. Super. 371 (unit owners remain liable for common expenses; breach may give rise to damages but not automatic relief from dues)
Robbins v. Jersey City, 23 N.J. 229 (opposing party must show competent evidential material to defeat summary judgment)
Petersen v. Twp. of Raritan, 418 N.J. Super. 125 (conclusory, self-serving assertions insufficient to defeat summary judgment)