Rosty v. Skaj
2012 WY 28
| Wyo. | 2012Background
- This is a consolidated appeal challenging a district court default judgment and denial of a motion to set aside entry of default/default judgment.
- Plaintiffs Shari and Steve Skaj sued Rosty, R&R Roofing, and Rosty’s employer for injuries from a truck incident involving alleged drugs.
- Rosty defaulted; other defendants were dismissed without prejudice.
- A judgment on default was entered after a hearing in October 2010, awarding substantial damages and punitive damages.
- Rosty sought relief and appealed the district court’s denial; the court consolidated related appeals for jurisdictional and merits review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of Rosty’s appeal | Rosty’s Rule 55(c) motion isn’t under Rule 6(c)(2) deemed-denied | Appeal timely under Rule 2.01 once order denied | Appeal timely filed |
| Due process and notice for the default judgment hearing | Rule 55(b)(2) requires three-day notice after appearance | Appearance timely; three-day notice satisfied | No due process violation; three-day notice applied when appearance allowed hearing |
| Service of process and personal jurisdiction | Service on Rosty’s mother at his usual abode may have been defective due to her incompetence | Appellant did not prove incompetence; service valid | Service proper; district court did not err in rejecting incompetence challenge |
| Punitives: wealth evidence required | Wealth/financial condition established; supports punitive damages | No sufficient wealth evidence to support punitive damages | Punitive damages reversed for lack of wealth evidence |
| Abuse of discretion in denying set-aside relief | Relief warranted under Rule 55(c)/60(b) given service and notice defects | No abuse; service valid and merits not shown to justify relief | District court’s denial of relief affirmed, except punitive damages reversed on wealth grounds |
Key Cases Cited
- Lykins v. Habitat for Humanity, The Heart of Wy., Inc., 2010 WY 118 (Wy. 2010) (discretion in setting aside default judgments; burden on movant)
- Vanasse v. Ramsay, 847 P.2d 993 (Wy. 1993) (diligence standard for default procedures; three-day notice policy)
- Adel v. Parkhurst, 681 P.2d 886 (Wy. 1984) (wealth evidence required for punitive damages in default cases)
- Alexander v. Meduna, 2002 WY 83, 47 P.3d 206 (Wy. 2002) (punitive damages framework and wealth consideration)
- Sears v. Summit, Inc., 616 P.2d 765 (Wy. 1980) (reversal where wealth evidence insufficient for punitive damages)
- Hoke v. Motel 6 Jackson & Accor N. Am., Inc., 2006 WY 38, 131 P.3d 369 (Wy. 2006) (strict compliance with service of process; void judgment if improper service)