Contracts: Default Judgment-“Lulling” Statements

Plaintiff appealed the order of the trial court setting aside the default judgment entered against defendants in plaintiff’s breach of contract claim. Plaintiff argued that respondents’ reliance on plaintiff’s alleged “lulling” statements that it was not pursuing a lawsuit and that respondents did not need to take any action or hire legal counsel did not constitute good cause to set aside the judgment.

Where respondents’ failure to appear in the action was attributed to their location outside the state, resulting delays in receiving notice, plaintiff’s repeated lulling statements, and the parties’ settlement negotiations, the trial court found good cause to set aside the default judgment where respondents promptly hired counsel and filed their motion upon receiving the judgment.

Judgment is affirmed.

Liora Tech, Inc. v. United Medical Network, Inc. (MLW No. 79577/Case No. ED110668 – 8 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Stevens, J.) Appealed from circuit court, St. Louis County, Hilton, J. (Joe D. Jacobson for appellant) (Katherine M. Flett and Jeffrey R. Schmitt for respondent)