NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Submitted August 21, 2013
On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Special Civil Part, Bergen County, Docket No. DC-028849-11.
Pressler and Pressler, L.L.P., attorneys for appellant (Lawrence J. McDermott, Jr., on the brief).
Respondent has not filed a brief.
Before Judges Waugh and Haas.
Plaintiff Midland Funding, LLC appeals from the May 4, 2012 decision of the Special Civil Part denying its motion to have a default judgment entered against defendant Douglas Alprin. Plaintiff also challenges the court's June 8, 2012 decision denying its motion for reconsideration. We dismiss this appeal as interlocutory because the decisions being appealed are not final as to all issues.
Plaintiff is the owner by assignment and purchase of defendant's defaulted Visa credit card account. The amount due was $717.33. On October 11, 2011, plaintiff filed a Special Civil Part suit against defendant seeking to recover this amount, plus interest. Defendant did not file an answer to the complaint and, pursuant to Rule 6:6-2, default was entered against him.
Thereafter, on December 8, 2011, plaintiff and defendant negotiated a settlement under which defendant agreed to pay the amount due in monthly installments. The settlement was embodied in a written stipulation of settlement, which was prepared by plaintiff's attorney and signed by defendant. The stipulation provided that, if defendant "default[ed] under the terms of this settlement, " plaintiff could "move for an Order for the entry of judgment . . . ." Plaintiff submitted the stipulation to the court for filing.
According to a certification filed by plaintiff's attorney, defendant only made one of the required installment payments. Plaintiff then filed a motion with the Special Civil Part "to enter judgment" against defendant for the amount still due.
On May 4, 2012, the motion judge denied plaintiff's request. The judge found that plaintiff's motion was "tantamount to a request for [the entry of] a default judgment" under Rule 6:6-3(a) and, therefore, he believed that plaintiff was required to submit certain documentation in support of its application before it could be considered. Specifically, the judge found that plaintiff should have submitted an affidavit demonstrating that defendant was not in military service, and a separate affidavit setting forth the source of the address used for service of the summons and complaint.
Rather than supplying this requested documentation, plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration, which the judge denied on June 8, 2012. This appeal followed and plaintiff has ...