Comparing The Differences Between The Entry Of Default And A Default Judgment In New Jersey
- Peter Lamont, Esq.
- 4 hours ago
- 6 min read
Comparing The Differences Between The Entry Of Default And A Default Judgment In New Jersey
People use the word default as if it means a judgment already exists. New Jersey practice separates the concept into two distinct stages. The first stage is the entry of default under Rule 4:43 1. The second stage is a default judgment under Rule 4:43 2. The distinction matters because the legal effect, the available remedies, and the difficulty of fixing the problem change dramatically once judgment enters.
What An Entry Of Default Means
An entry of default is a procedural event. It is a notation that the defendant failed to plead or otherwise defend within the permitted time. It does not, by itself, give the plaintiff a money judgment. It does not create an enforceable lien. It does not allow the plaintiff to levy on accounts. It is the court system’s way of marking that the defendant has not participated and that the plaintiff may proceed toward judgment.
From a defense perspective, this stage is often the last relatively forgiving moment to get the case back on track. Courts have discretion to vacate an entry of default, often on a showing of good cause supported by a proposed answer and a real defense. A defendant who moves quickly and supports the request with competent proofs often has a meaningful chance to reopen the litigation path at this stage.
Under N.J. Ct. R. 4:43-1, when a party fails to plead or otherwise defend, the clerk enters a default on the docket. This is purely procedural and does not grant judgment rights.
What A Default Judgment Means
A default judgment is the end product. It is a judgment entered against the defendant that can be enforced through post judgment collection tools. It can lead to restraints, executions, and the pressure points that come with a recorded judgment. At this stage, the case is no longer just pending. The plaintiff has a judgment, and the defendant is now fighting to undo a completed result.
Relief after judgment is typically pursued through Rule 4:50 1, which is a higher bar in real world practice than a motion directed at an entry of default. The court still has discretion, but the defendant is asking the court to unwind a judgment that the plaintiff is entitled to rely on unless and until it is set aside.
Under N.J. Ct. R. 4:43-2, after default is entered, the plaintiff may seek default judgment either by the clerk (for a sum certain) or by the court, often requiring proofs or hearings.
The Practical Differences That Matter Most
The entry of default changes status. The default judgment changes rights. That is the cleanest way to keep the concepts straight.
At the entry of default stage, the plaintiff has momentum but not a judgment. The defendant is exposed, but the defendant can often reenter the case with a timely, well supported motion, a proposed pleading, and a factual defense. Many judges are receptive to restoring a case to the merits at this stage, particularly where the delay is short and the plaintiff has not suffered meaningful litigation prejudice.
At the default judgment stage, the plaintiff has an enforceable outcome and collection may start quickly. The defendant faces both the legal standard for relief and the practical urgency created by enforcement activity. Even where a defendant has a strong defense, delay and weak proofs can cause the motion to fail. Courts place weight on whether the defendant acted promptly after learning of the lawsuit and whether the explanation for the default is credible and supported.
Proof Of Damages And The Court’s Role
Another difference appears in damages practice. An entry of default does not require the court to evaluate the amount of money owed. A default judgment often does. Many plaintiffs can only obtain judgment through an application to the judge supported by certifications and exhibits, and sometimes supported by a proof hearing. The court looks for a reliable basis to fix damages and may decline requests that are inflated, speculative, or unsupported.
This matters for defendants because the longer a defendant waits, the more the record solidifies around the plaintiff’s damages presentation. Early participation, or early motion practice after default, helps prevent a one sided damages narrative from turning into a judgment amount that becomes difficult to unwind.
What Defendants Should Do When They Discover Either One
A defendant who learns there is an entry of default should treat it as urgent and solvable, then act immediately to prepare a proper motion, a proposed answer, and proofs supporting a real defense. A defendant who learns there is a default judgment should treat it as urgent and dangerous because enforcement can move quickly. In both situations, the defendant should gather service documents, mail records, internal communications, insurance coverage information, and the facts needed to show a substantive defense.
Businesses should also fix the process problem that created the default in the first place. Registered agent monitoring, address management, and internal routing for legal papers are operational issues that regularly become litigation disasters. Courts hear the same explanations repeatedly. A defendant who shows the court both a credible reason for the default and a credible plan to prevent recurrence presents as a serious litigant rather than a chronic delay actor.
Conclusion
In New Jersey, the entry of default under Rule 4:43 1 is a warning flare that the defendant missed the response deadline. A default judgment under Rule 4:43 2 is the enforceable result that follows when the plaintiff completes the required steps and the court enters judgment. The window for efficient repair is widest at the entry stage, and it narrows substantially once judgment enters. Fast action and well supported motion practice are the difference makers.
Contact us today to discuss your business or legal matter. Put our 20+ years of legal experience to work for you.
For detailed insights and legal assistance on topics discussed in this post, including litigation, contact the Law Offices of Peter J. Lamont at our Bergen County Office. We're here to answer your questions and provide legal advice. Contact us at (201) 904-2211 or email us at info@pjlesq.com.
Interested in More Legal Insights?
Explore our range of resources on business and legal matters. Subscribe to our podcast and YouTube channel for a wealth of information covering various business and legal topics. For specific inquiries or to discuss your legal matter with an attorney from our team, please email me directly at pl@pjlesq.com or call at (201) 904-2211. Your questions are important to us, and we look forward to providing the answers you need.
About Peter J. Lamont, Esq.
Peter J. Lamont is a nationally recognized attorney with significant experience in business, contract, litigation, and real estate law. With over two decades of legal practice, he has represented a wide array of businesses, including large international corporations. Peter is known for his practical legal and business advice, prioritizing efficient and cost-effective solutions for his clients.
Peter has an Avvo 10.0 Rating and has been acknowledged as one of America's Most Honored Lawyers since 2011. 201 Magazine and Lawyers of Distinction have also recognized him for being one of the top business and litigation attorneys in New Jersey. His commitment to his clients and the legal community is further evidenced by his active role as a speaker, lecturer, and published author in various legal and business publications.
As the founder of the Law Offices of Peter J. Lamont, Peter brings his Wall Street experience and client-focused approach to New Jersey, offering personalized legal services that align with each client's unique needs and goals.
DISCLAIMERS: The contents of this website and post are intended to convey general information only and not to provide legal advice or opinions. The contents of this website and the posting and viewing of the information on this website should not be construed as, and should not be relied upon for, legal or tax advice in any particular circumstance or fact situation. Nothing on this website is an offer to represent you, and nothing on this website is intended to create an attorney‑client relationship. An attorney-client relationship may only be established through direct attorney‑to‑client communication that is confirmed by the execution of an engagement agreement.
As with any legal issue, it is important that you obtain competent legal counsel before making any decisions about how to respond to a subpoena or whether to challenge one, even if you believe that compliance is not required. Because each situation is different, it may be impossible for this article to address all issues raised by every situation encountered in responding to a subpoena. The information below can give you guidance regarding some common issues related to subpoenas, but you should consult with an attorney before taking any actions (or refraining from acts) based on these suggestions. This post will also focus on New Jersey law. If you receive a subpoena in a state other than New Jersey, you should immediately seek the advice of an attorney in your state, as certain rules differ in other states.
Disclaimer: Recognition by Legal Awards
The legal awards and recognitions mentioned above do not constitute an endorsement or guarantee of future performance. These honors reflect an attorney's past achievements and should not be considered as predictors of future results. They are not intended to compare one lawyer's services with those of other lawyers. The process for selecting an attorney for these awards can vary and may not include a review of the lawyer's competence in specific areas of practice. Potential clients should perform their own evaluation when seeking legal representation. No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court of New Jersey.