My wife filed for divorce and I've appeared before the court twice thus far. I didn't think she was actually going through with it and I was wanting to salvage the marriage. The last appearance the judge put everything on hold such as temporary relief. Since, her attorney filed this motion because I did not initially respond in writing.

I currently don't agree with what's in the divorce papers and we are going through with it, mutual at this point. What can I expect at this hearing and will I have any recourse? I just hope she doesn't win on default.

Thanks in advance!!

If it is a motoin for a default hearing, then yes they are filing to make the divorce final because you have not properly responded.

If you are "going though with it" then you must be agreeing to the terms of the divorce.

You will not be able to STOP a divorce, you can delay it, but that is really silly since you can't win, she will get the divorce.

So since it was on hold, how many medication meetings have you went to, how many meetings to discuss the issues and try and work out a deal.
If none, most likely the judge will just grant a divorce at this meeting

I'm not trying to stop the divorce, I just want the terms mediated to be fair. I'm trying to find out if there is recourse at this point.

Does the judge typically award the default or is there an opportunity to renegotiate the terms.

Comments on this post
bridges100 disagrees: vague

First, may I call your attention to the guidelines for using the comments feature found here:

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/feedba...ure-24951.html

Chuck is trying to help you. Your OP had bare facts so his answer was the accurate according to the facts you posted. The people here volunteer their time to help and you show your gratititude by giving a negative rating that was inappropriate.

You went into this divorce in a lackadaisical manner without an attorney up against your wife's attorney. You have set yourself up to lose.

I suggest you get yourself an attorney immediately so you can properly request renegotiation of the terms. If you continue to try to fight this on your won, you stand a good chance of losing.

Ask a vague question, get a vague answer.
You didn't even bother to say what state you are in. How in the world can anyone give accurate advice about what to expect in an unknown jurisdiction?

So there's a motion to enter a default (not all states do it that way incidentally--we don't have "motions for default" in California for example-we have default prove-up hearings or trials, and maybe that's the same).

You have got to give more details or you're not going to get a good answer from anyone.

Apperantly you have no understanding on how a site like this works or any public site.

( quote ) bridges100 disagrees: I don't appreciate your comments here, volunteering or not maybe you should'nt respond if you don't know what the hell your talking about. No one asked you to chime in... ( end quote )

Anyone has a chance to chime in and both FrChuck and ScottGem gave good advice based upon what was written. Just because you can't seem to make up your mind doesn't mean we here can't give advice based on experience or research.

If you don't like the public forum format then don't post.

I'll give you a little lesson on defaults and maybe this will help.

Defaults are a two-step process. First there's an entry of default (which the clerks can enter) and then there's a default judgment (which only a judge can enter a family law case and is the final word on how the case is decided). The two can happen at the same time but often don't.

The default merely prevents an answer or response from being filed (i.e. it keeps the defendant/respondent out of the case by preventing that party's participation).

Now, in family law it is not uncommon for agreements to be entered into to divide property, decide custody of kids, support, all of that, even though there is a default on file. The agreement is submitted to the court for entry of judgment. No problem and we do this all the time. But if there is no agreement, then the case has to be decided (all those issues that is) by a judge at a trial (called a default prove-up hearing or default trial). The plaintiff/petitioner has to prove the case--i.e, put on evidence just like in any trial but the defendant/respondent isn't invited to participate because he or she chose not to follow the rules and be in the case. The judge then makes a decision and that's it.

There are ways to set aside defaults and even after a default judgment certain aspects of the case that have already been decided are still subject to modification --even by the defaulting party-- like child custody, and support issues. So there are several in's and out's to answering a question like yours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cadillac59

I'll give you a little lesson on defaults and maybe this will help.

Defaults are a two-step process. First there's an entry of default (which the clerks can enter) and then there's a default judgment (which only a judge can enter in a family law case and is the final word on how the case is decided). The two can happen at the same time but often don't.

The default merely prevents an answer or response from being filed (i.e., it keeps the defendant/respondent out of the case by preventing that party's participation).

Now, in family law it is not uncommon for agreements to be entered into to divide property, decide custody of kids, support, all of that, even though there is a default on file. The agreement is submitted to the court for entry of judgment. No problem and we do this all the time. But if there is no agreement, then the case has to be decided (all those issues that is) by a judge at a trial (called a default prove-up hearing or default trial). The plaintiff/petitioner has to prove the case--i.e, put on evidence just like in any trial but the defendant/respondent isn't invited to participate because he or she chose not to follow the rules and be in the case. The judge then makes a decision and that's it.

There are ways to set aside defaults and even after a default judgment certain aspects of the case that have already been decided are still subject to modification --even by the defaulting party-- like child custody, and support issues. So there are several in's and out's to answering a question like yours.

---

I'll move to vacate the judgment if it goes through...

Comments on this post
bridges100 disagrees: I don't appreciate your comments here, volunteering or not maybe you should'nt respond if you don't know what the hell your talking about. No one asked you to chime in...

Did you even bother to read the rules in that post I linked to?

I know EXACTLY what I'm talking about (as others point out). When you post a question on a site like this, you ask anyone who wants to "to chime in". So, in effect you asked me to. You don't have to "appreciate my comments", but its inappropriate to use the comments feature to do so.

If you are not going to use this site according to its rules then you will not be allowed to use it.

I'll move to vacate the judgment if it goes through...

Right, and that's exactly what you should do.

Keep in mind that default judgments are easy to set aside, especially if you act on them right away. So what I usually do is just go to the other side and ask them to set aside the default or I work out an agreement for entry of judgment with them. Typically I'll say, "hey, come on. You know if you get a default I'm just going to go in and have it set aside so you guys are just wasting your time doing this..why put everyone through all this hassle for nothing?" Half the time I don't even need to say that much because it's really never a big deal. Sometimes if I send a letter telling someone I'm coming in the case they'll just send me a stip to set aside the default. Maybe it's a little harder outside of California but I kind of doubt it.