Choice Hotels International, Inc. v. Grover

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendants’ motion to vacate default judgment entered against them in action alleging that defendants breached franchise agreement, even though defendants argued that they were victims of their original attorney’s failure to file answer to complaint or file more timely motion to vacate default judgment. Instant motion to set aside default judgment was filed more than one year after entry of final judgment, and thus defendants were required under Rule 60(b)(6) to establish existence of “extraordinary circumstances.” Moreover, defendants did not establish such standard where defendants merely alleged that their counsel committed malpractice. As such, while defendants had potential malpractice claim against their attorney, they could not reopen instant case, where plaintiff played no role with respect to any malpractice committed by defendant’s attorney. Ct. further observed that defendants could have taken steps to discover their attorney’s alleged inaction and could have taken more timely steps to retain substitute counsel.