116 A.3d 458
Me.2015Background
- Mason Station, LLC failed to pay property taxes on multiple Wiscasset properties, triggering tax liens and a tax lien foreclosure regime under 36 M.R.S. §§ 942, 943 (2014).
- Town of Wiscasset filed a December 2012 complaint for past taxes; Mason Station was served December 11, 2012 but did not answer within 20 days as required by M.R. Civ. P. 12(a).
- Town sought default and a default judgment; clerk entered default and judgment on January 25, 2013 in the amount of $846,263.67; writ of execution issued March 10, 2013.
- Mason Station moved on July 10, 2014 to set aside the default and for relief from judgment under Rule 55(c) and Rule 60(b), asserting a meritorious defense based on automatic foreclosure occurred by January 18, 2013.
- The trial court denied the motions; Mason Station appealed the denials, and the Court affirmed the judgment.
- The record indicated the properties’ fair market value had not been established and there were environmental concerns potentially affecting value.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the denial of the Rule 55(c) default-set-aside was an abuse of discretion. | Mason Station asserts good cause due to meritorious defense and foreclosed property value exceeding taxes. | Town contends no good excuse for untimely response and no proven value in excess of the debt. | No abuse; no good excuse shown; merits of defense not proven sufficient. |
| Whether relief from judgment under Rule 60(b) was appropriate given foreclosures and timing. | Mason Station argues foreclosures satisfied or exceeded the debt, justifying relief from judgment. | Town maintains Rule 60(b) relief requires proper steps and timely action; here not met. | Relief denied; failure to timely act or demonstrate equitable grounds. |
Key Cases Cited
- Richter v. Ercolini, 2010 ME 38 (Me. 2010) (good-cause standard for setting aside default requires excusable delay and meritorious defense)
- Ezell v. Lawless, 2008 ME 139 (Me. 2008) (Rule 60(b) relief not a substitute for direct appeal)
- Cote Corp. v. Kelley Earthworks, Inc., 2014 ME 93 (Me. 2014) (court weighs factors for Rule 60(b) relief and default guidance)
- Tarbuck v. Jaeckel, 2000 ME 105 (Me. 2000) (abuse-of-discretion standard in weighing Rule 60(b) factors)
- Beck v. Beck, 1999 ME 110 (Me. 1999) (Rule 60(b) relief prerequisites and discretion)