RAYMOND EKAMBI VS. BEATRICE J. WALLS (L-4784-13, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
A-0358-15T3
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | Jul 20, 2017Background
- Plaintiff Raymond Ekambi fell on a defective sidewalk abutting property in East Orange and sued property owners Beatrice J. Walls and her son Darryl C. Walls for negligence.
- Beatrice owned the property but lived in New York; Darryl lived at the residence, paid no rent, and handled bills and maintenance.
- Process server's affidavit asserted personal service on Darryl and left a copy with Darryl for Beatrice; defendants did not answer and a default judgment for $64,000 was entered after a proof hearing.
- Defendants successfully moved to vacate the default judgment; the trial judge found service on Darryl uncertain and that Beatrice did not reside at the premises, and concluded defendants had a meritorious defense.
- After discovery, defendants moved for summary judgment asserting "sidewalk immunity" because the property was used solely for residential purposes under the Grijalba four-factor test; the motion judge granted summary judgment and dismissed the complaint.
- The Appellate Division affirmed both the grant of summary judgment (sidewalk immunity) and the trial judge's decision to vacate the default judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether defendants are entitled to sidewalk immunity (summary judgment) | Ekambi: property not owner‑occupied; therefore not purely residential and could be commercial/investment -> no immunity | Walls: property predominantly residential; no rental income or leasing; Grijalba factors favor residential use -> immunity applies | Court: Affirmed summary judgment — Grijalba factors show residential use; sidewalk immunity applies |
| Whether default judgment should have been vacated under R. 4:50-1 | Ekambi: defendants failed to show good cause or meritorious defense to justify vacatur | Walls: service was defective/uncertain and they presented a meritorious defense (sidewalk immunity) | Court: Affirmed vacatur — trial judge did not abuse discretion in vacating default given service concerns and meritorious defense |
Key Cases Cited
- Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 142 N.J. 520 (1995) (standard for evaluating summary judgment evidence in favor of non-moving party)
- Stewart v. 104 Wallace Street, Inc., 87 N.J. 146 (1981) (framework regarding owner liability for defective sidewalks)
- Grijalba v. Floro, 431 N.J. Super. 57 (App. Div. 2013) (four-factor test for distinguishing residential vs. commercial use for sidewalk immunity)
- Davis v. Brickman Landscaping, Ltd., 219 N.J. 395 (2014) (summary judgment standard reaffirmation)
- U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Guillaume, 209 N.J. 449 (2012) (standard of review — abuse of discretion — for Rule 4:50-1 vacatur decisions)