Perhaps it is a coincidence, but the pandemic seems to have caused an uptick in Family Part default judgments. It makes sense that isolation, combined with the end of a marriage, would lead to, or trigger underlying, mental health issues that make the prospect of “divorce” intolerable for some spouses. In turn, the perceived best option for those spouses is the “ostrich” approach. Of course, this is the worst approach for a spouse to take when facing a divorce; the result perforce of a default judgment may be that the “avoiding” spouse receives a judgment that is less than would have otherwise been obtained in a contested matter. Equally problematic is that a default judgment is actually quite difficult to set aside in the Family Part.

Pursuant to Rule 4:50-1, upon the filing of a motion and brief, a court may relieve a party from a final judgment or order for a variety of reasons, including: “(a) mistake, inadvertence … or excusable neglect; (b) newly discovered evidence … ; (c) fraud … misrepresentation, or other misconduct … ; (d) the judgment or order is void; … or (f) any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment or order.” The Rule is “designed to reconcile the strong interests in finality of judgments and judicial efficiency with the equitable notion that courts should have authority to avoid an unjust result in any given case.” US Bank Nat. Ass’n v. Guillaume, 209 N.J. 449, 467 (2012) (internal quotation and citations omitted). A party has one year to file a Motion to Vacate pursuant to subsections (a)-(c), and a “reasonable” period of time for the remaining subsections. See R. 4:50-2.