The respondent husband brought a motion to set aside a final divorce order obtained on default after he failed to file an answer and financial statement within extended deadlines.
The court considered whether the delay, the indulgences granted by opposing counsel, and post-deadline discussions affected the validity of the default.
Balancing the principle of finality against the preference for determining disputes on their merits, the court held that the merits should prevail, particularly given the ongoing nature of support obligations.
The equalization order was set aside, but several other provisions of the divorce order were maintained as interim orders pending trial.
The moving party was ordered to promptly file financial disclosure and pay costs of the motion.
