Utah Supreme Court

Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake and Sandy, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Zdenek Sorf, Defendant and Appellant

May 10, 2013734 Utah Adv. Rep. 36

Summary

The Utah Supreme Court vacated the district court’s denial of Zdenek Sorf’s motion to set aside a default judgment and remanded for further proceedings. It held that the lower court abused its discretion by focusing solely on service of process without determining whether Sorf was mistaken or excusably neglectful, and it found that Sorf had alleged a meritorious defense. The decision rests on the equitable purposes of Rule 60(b) and the low pleading threshold for a meritorious defense.

Holding

  • Whether the district court correctly denied Sorf’s Rule 60(b) motion on the basis that he was properly served and therefore did not show mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.. The district court abused its discretion by refusing to consider whether Sorf was mistaken or excusably neglectful; the denial is vacated and the case remanded for factual determination.
  • Whether Sorf alleged a meritorious defense sufficient to satisfy Rule 60(b).. Sorf’s proposed defenses meet the low pleading standard for a meritorious defense; the district court’s conclusion that they were not meritorious as a matter of law was erroneous.

Docket 20110443

Cited authorities

  • rule 60(b) of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure
  • rule 18(d) of the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure
  • rule 60(b)
  • rule 60(b)
  • Rule 60(b)(1)
  • Rule 60(b)(1)
  • rule 60(b)
  • rule 60(b)

Cited by

Read full opinionPDF
Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake and Sandy, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Zdenek Sorf, Defendant and Appellant (Utah 2013) | LawDiver