Douglas Hunter, Appellant-Defendant v. UHG LLC (2025)

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Statement of the Case

[1] UHG I, LLC (“UHG”) sued Douglas Hunter to collect $4,730 in overdue debt and filed a motion for default judgment after Hunter failed to appear or respond. The trial court entered the default judgment against Hunter. Hunter now appeals and raises two issues that we restate as the following single issue: Whether the trial court erred in entering default judgment. Because Hunter failed to follow the proper procedure for perfecting his appeal of this issue, we dismiss his appeal.

Facts and Procedural History

[2] On February 26, 2025, UHG filed a complaint against Hunter, alleging Hunter failed to repay an outstanding debt and owed a principal balance of $4,730.65.¹ ,  ² On March 11, the Marion County Sheriff's Office served Hunter with a copy of the summons and complaint. According to the serving officer, a copy of the summons and complaint was left at Hunter's residence located at 3447 Guilford Ave, Indianapolis, Indiana. After Hunter failed to appear or respond to the complaint, UHG filed a motion for default judgment, which the trial court granted. In its May 2 order for default judgment, the trial court determined that “service of process was properly effected” on Hunter. Appellant's App. Vol. II at 6. On May 30, Hunter appealed the default judgment.

Discussion and Decision

[3] Hunter argues that the default judgment should be vacated because he received improper service of process. Specifically, Hunter claims that UHG “possessed documentary evidence ․ showing [Hunter's] current address but still directed service to an outdated location.” Appellant's Br. at 7. “A judgment by default ․ may be set aside by the court for the grounds and in accordance with the provisions of Rule 60(B).” Ind. Trial Rule 55(C). Indiana Trial Rule 60(B) “permits a party to move for relief from a default judgment ‘within a reasonable time’ thereafter when ․ that ‘judgment is void.’ ” Greer v. Discover Bank, 49 N.E.3d 1110, 1111 (Ind. Ct. App. 2016) (quoting T.R. 60(B)). Our Indiana Supreme Court has “explained that ‘the proper procedure ․ for setting aside a[ ] ․ grant of default judgment [ ] is to first file a Rule 60(B) motion to have the ․ default judgment set aside.’ ” Expert Pool Builders, LLC v. Vangundy, 224 N.E.3d 309, 314 (Ind. 2024) (quoting Siebert Oxidermo, Inc. v. Shields, 446 N.E.2d 332, 337 (Ind. 1983)). An appeal of a default judgment is not “properly before us” unless the appellant has first filed a Rule 60(B) motion to have the default judgment set aside and the trial court has ruled on that motion. Greer, 49 N.E.3d at 1111.

[4] Here, Hunter did not file a Trial Rule 60(B) motion to have the default judgment set aside. Hunter instead filed this appeal as a collateral attack, claiming service was sent to the wrong address and that he did not receive proper notice. In making these unverified assertions, Hunter is asking us to find facts that were never presented to the trial court. This, we will not do. It is the trial court's role to find facts and consider the merits of Hunter's assertions. Id. at 1112. Accordingly, his appeal is not properly before us. See id. at 1111. We therefore dismiss this case.

[5] Dismissed.

APPELLANT PRO SE, Douglas Hunter, Indianapolis, Indiana

FOOTNOTES

1.   Hunter fails to include a copy of the complaint and summons in his Appendix, see Ind. Appellate Rule 50(A), so we have taken judicial notice of them pursuant to Indiana Appellate Rule 27.

2.   Hunter's Statement of Case and Statement of Facts are devoid of citations to the record, as required by Appellate Rules 46(A)(5) and 46(A)(6)(a) respectively.

Felix, Judge.

Judges Brown and Scheele concur. Brown, J., and Scheele, J., concur.