Front Row Motors, LLC and Jerramy Johnson v. Scott Jones, 2014 Ind. LEXIS 256

Jones bought a used car from Front Row Motors, LLC; he alleged odometer rollback and sued under the Indiana Deceptive Sales Act.
Counsel initially appeared for Front Row and answered; discovery proceeded and Johnson (owner/registered agent) had depositions scheduled.
On March 23, 2011 Johnson was in Hamilton County Community Corrections; counsel withdrew; Johnson failed to appear for deposition twice and Jones moved for default as a sanction.
Jones amended to add Johnson personally; neither defendant answered the amended complaint and Jones sought a default judgment and damages; notice of the damages hearing was mailed to Johnson’s home and business addresses but not to the corrections facility where Jones knew Johnson was located.
The trial court entered a default judgment jointly and severally against Front Row and Johnson. Later, counsel reappeared and moved under Trial Rule 60(B) to set aside the defaults for imperfect service; the court set aside the judgment as to Johnson but denied relief for Front Row.
The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal for lack of finality; the Indiana Supreme Court accepted transfer and considered whether the order was appealable and whether the default against Front Row should be set aside.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court’s partial grant/denial of a Rule 60(B) motion was a final, appealable order	The order was not final because it did not dispose of all parties; appeal should be dismissed	The Rule 60(C) deeming provision makes rulings on motions to set aside default judgments final and appealable	The order is appealable under Trial Rule 60(C); appellate courts have jurisdiction
Whether the default judgment against Front Row Motors was void for lack of personal jurisdiction due to imperfect service	Jones argued service was adequate (mail to listed/known addresses) and implied actual knowledge; opposed relief for Front Row	Front Row argued Jones knew Johnson (registered agent) was at community corrections and did not serve the registered agent there, so notice was not reasonably calculated to inform the LLC	The court held service was inadequate; because Front Row lacked notice the default was void for want of personal jurisdiction and must be set aside
Standard of review for denial of motion to set aside default judgment	N/A (procedural)	N/A (procedural)	Denial reviewed for abuse of discretion but courts favor disposition on the merits and resolve doubts for the defaulted party
Effect of appellee failing to file a brief	N/A	N/A	Court may reverse on prima facie error shown by appellant; here prima facie error existed favoring reversal

Martin v. Amoco Oil Co., 696 N.E.2d 383 (Ind. 1998) (T.R. 54(B) final-judgment requirements)
Coslett v. Weddle Bros. Const. Co., 798 N.E.2d 859 (Ind. 2003) (ruling on motion to set aside default deemed final under T.R. 60(C))
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Watson, 747 N.E.2d 545 (Ind. 2001) (standard of review and disfavor of default judgments)
Stidham v. Whelchel, 698 N.E.2d 1152 (Ind. 1998) (burden on movant to show grounds to set aside default; lack of service renders judgment void)
Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306 (1950) (due process requires notice reasonably calculated to inform the defendant)
In re Adoption of L.D., 938 N.E.2d 666 (Ind. 2010) (notice must be reasonably calculated to inform defendant)
Trinity Homes, LLC v. Fang, 848 N.E.2d 1065 (Ind. 2006) (appellate consequences when appellee does not file a brief)