C.R.C.P. 242.27

History

Source: Entire rule added and adopted May 20, 2021, effective for cases filed with the Presiding Disciplinary Judge or the Supreme Court on or after July 1, 2021, and, as to all other matters covered by these rules, effective July 1, 2021. ANNOTATION Annotator’s note. The following annotations include cases decided under former provisions similar to this rule. Both the charges and the well-pleaded facts are deemed admitted by the entry of a default judgment. People v. Richards, 748 P.2d 341 (Colo. 1987); People v. Y oung, 201 P.3d 1273 (Colo. O.P .D.J. 2008). The allegations of fact were deemed admit- ted where attorney did not answer the com- plaint filed in the case and the hearing board entered a default against him. People v. Davies, 926 P.2d 572 (Colo. 1996); In re Demaray, 8 P.3d 427 (Colo. 1999). A motion to set aside a default because the respondent failed to file a timely answer un- der this rule can be analogized to a motion under C.R.C.P. 60 (b)(1). The decision to grant relief is entrusted to the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed on appeal unless there is an abuse of discretion. In re Weisbard, 25 P.3d 24 (Colo. 2001). In a motion to set aside a default judg- ment, the movant bears the burden of prov- ing the grounds for relief by clear, strong, and satisfactory proof. In re Weisbard, 25 P.3d 24 (Colo. 2001). Because an attorney has a duty to cooper- ate with disciplinary proceedings, default judgments are not subject to being set aside easily. In re Weisbard, 25 P.3d 24 (Colo. 2001). In setting aside a default judgment on the grounds of excusable neglect, the court must determine: Whether the neglect causing the default was excusable; whether the movant has alleged a meritorious defense; and whether re- lief from the order would be equitable. In re Weisbard, 25 P.3d 24 (Colo. 2001). Failure to act because of carelessness and negligence is not excusable neglect. In re Weisbard, 25 P.3d 24 (Colo. 2001). Applied in People v. Moore, 681 P.2d 480 (Colo. 1984); People v. Stauffer, 745 P.2d 240 (Colo. 1987); People v. Jacobson, 747 P.2d 654 (Colo. 1987); People v. Dohe, 800 P.2d 71 (Colo. 1990); People v. Ashley, 817 P.2d 965 (Colo. 1991); People v. Rouse, 817 P.2d 967 (Colo. 1991); People v. Barr, 855 P.2d 1386 (Colo. 1993); In the Matter of Scott, 979 P.2d 572 (Colo. 1999).