The moving party sought to set aside default family law orders for spousal support, child support, and equalization that were issued after his pleadings were struck for repeated disclosure failures and non‑compliance with court orders.
He argued the orders were based on incorrect assumptions about his income and relied on a later forensic accounting report indicating significantly lower earnings.
The court applied the principles governing motions to set aside default judgments, including timeliness, explanation for default, arguable merits, prejudice, and the interests of justice.
The court found the moving party had failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for years of delay and persistent non‑compliance with disclosure and support orders.
Considering the prejudice to the responding party and the integrity of the administration of justice, the motion was dismissed.
