XXX
XXX
XXX
XXX
Defendant in pro se
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF XXX
LAW DIVISION: UNION COUNTY
SPECIAL CIVIL PART
| XXX,
Plaintiff, vs. XXX, Defendant(s) |
)
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) |
Docket No.: XXX
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT |
NOTICE OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT
You are hereby notified that on (Date) at __________ (am/pm), Defendant will bring on for hearing her Motion to Set Aside Judgment. It will be based on this Notice of Motion, the attached Motion to Set Aside Judgment, exhibits adduced and oral arguments presented during the hearing of the Motion.
Dated this _____ day of April, XXX.
Respectfully Submitted,
________________________________________
Linda Harris,
Defendant in pro se
XXX
XXX
XXX
XXX
Defendant in pro se
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
LAW DIVISION: UNION COUNTY
SPECIAL CIVIL PART
XXX
| ,
Plaintiff, vs. XXX, Defendant(s) |
)
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) |
Docket No.: XXX
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT |
MOTION TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT
NOW COMES XXX, Defendant, and files this Motion to Set Aside Judgment, and for cause would show this Honorable Court as follows:
- On April 5, XXX, this Court issued a Judgment for Possession After Trial.
- New Jersey Court Rule 4:501provides: On motion, with briefs, and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or the party’s legal representative from a final judgment or order for the following reasons: (a) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (b) newly discovered evidence which would probably alter the judgment or order and which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial…”
- Defendant would like this Court to set aside the Judgment for Possession After Trial issued on April 5, XXX on the grounds of new evidence that was not discovered during trial.
- Defendant who is pro se (self-represent) and also is legally physically and mentally handicapped disabled as outlined by Social Security Administration and not represented by a lawyer was not allowed to present her evidence before this Court. She was under the impression that the evidence she had presented in eCourt and to the Court in hard copy as was required per the Case Management and Summons and would be presented during trial and to the Judge. The Defendant who is currently under a care of a psychiatrist took prescription drugs that were prescribed by her psychiatrist and the Defendant was not under her right “mind” mentally during the trial and made statements and did not understand her legal rights during the trial. See Defendant’s psychiatrist letter March 28, XXX from St. Vincent’s Hospital. (See Exhibit A) is there any cases?
- In State v. Roszkowski, 222 N.J. Super. 530 (App. Div. 1988), the court held that a party may not be precluded from using evidence at trial that was discovered during the course of litigation simply because it was not specifically mentioned in a pretrial order.
- The evidence that Defendant intended to produce would have made her case stronger and prove why she held rent if the Defendant was in her right “mind” during the trial. Also when the Defendant moved in, she immediately notified the Plainfield Housing Authority of the conditions of the apartment and wondered why this apartment did not fail inspection. The Defendant emailed the Plainfield Housing Authority, the Bridgeway Rehabilitation Services, and the Plaintiff’s husband with photos of the conditions of the apartment when she moved in on October 1, 2020. Since the Defendant was not able to reach the Plaintiff directly; stating that the apartment was not habitable when the Defendant moved in on October 1, 2020, requested that the Plainfield Housing Authority to do a reinspection. The Defendant notified the Plaintiff’s realtor and the Plaintiff’s husband in regard to the repairs not being completed. The Defendant also sent numerous emails to the Plaintiff’s husband to provide the contact information since the Plaintiff’s husband was not listed on the lease, with no response from the Plaintiff’s husband. The Defendant’s cries went on deaf ears. All evidence was uploaded to the eCourt. As of today, no reinspection has taken place of the property or a new voucher was issued for the apartment. The Defendant’s new attorney will prove that the inspection report that Plaintiff Housing Authority was not done honestly when the Defendant moved into the apartment. However, the Plaintiff was still responsible on October 1, 2020, in making the apartment habitable; which it was not habitable on October 1, 2020, which the Defendant will prove this fact. The Defendant was left “homeless” on October 1, 2020, and will prove to the Court with hotel receipts. The Defendant will also show that rent payments were sent to the Plaintiff while the Defendant staying at hotels and not living in the apartment because of the necessary repairs; the Plainfield Housing Authority and Bridgeway Rehabilitation Services were aware of this fact; that the Defendant was left “homeless”. The Defendant who is mentally disabled was clearly taken advantaged off throughout this entire process and will provide evidence to the Court that she tried to get in touch with the Plaintiff though the Plaintiff’s husband without any success. Even when the Defendant moved back into the apartment; the Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s husband was notified of the necessary repairs needed in the apartment.
- The Defendant will also prove the rent that was not paid to the Plaintiff was used to make the necessary repairs to the apartment since the Plaintiff, Plaintiff’ Realtor and the Plaintiff’s husband refused to fix and were all put on notice. All the receipts were uploaded to the eCourt and it would have caused the judgment to have a different outcome. The Defendant should never have had to make any repairs to the apartment because this was a Section 8 Housing apartment and when the Defendant notified Plainfield Housing Authority that something was wrong with the apartment a reinspection should have taken place immediately and Plainfield Housing Authority should have termination the contract immediately. During those months the Defendant was not living at the apartment; the Defendant had surgery in December of 2020, while the Plainfield Housing Authority was still paying the Plaintiff and was put on notice that repairs needed to be done, the Defendant has hotels receipts, sent letters to the Plaintiff and the Plainfield Housing Authority in regards to the necessary repairs and why the rent was being held with no response from anyone. The Defendant will also show the court that the Plaintiff’s realtor was found in violation of Article (2) of the Code of Ethics when the Defendant moved in the property on October 1, 2020. The Defendant will prove that on October 1, 2020, that the apartment was not safe, sanitary and habitable housing in New Jersey. And that the Landlord has a duty to maintain the rental unit in safe and sanitary and habitable conditions and it was not.
- The irreparable harm of the verdict is that the Defendant who is pro se (self-represent) can lose her Section 8 Voucher because of this decision. Defendant was evicted because she was not represented by an attorney. The Defendant has a legal argument that she doesn’t owe this money because the Defendant has a repair and deduct situation that was sent to the Plaintiff and communications that were sent to the Plainfield Housing Authority that was ignored; and that evidence was uploaded to the eCourt System. The Defendant was not allowed to present during trial because she did not understand she needed to present her evidence in Court. The case needs to be reopened so the Defendant’s attorney can present all the evidence including the Defendant’s pictures evidence that she was not allow to present during trial and the Defendant attorney will be able to present during trial on her behalf.
- Defendant has not loss her Section 8 voucher; and the apartment has been recertified every year without an inspection in the apartment; despite the Defendant’s numerous requests to the Plainfield Housing Authority, Bridgeway Rehabilitation Services and to the Plaintiff in regard to the repairs in the apartment. And why the Defendant’s apartment was not reinspected on June 1, 2021 as per (HUD) Secretary Marcia L. Fudge announced that HUD will resume all in house home inspected. The Defendant apartment has never been reinspected; causing this wrongful inflated rent amount due to the Plaintiff.
- A Judgement For Possession was entered into the amount and this amount included fees that under the Harris Announcement the Plaintiff was not entitled to receive because the Defendant is under Section 8 Voucher through the Plainfield Housing Authority, the fees that the Plaintiff presented were never approved by the Plainfield Housing Authority and the Defendant argues that these fees were made up the Plaintiff and were not approved Section 8.
- Under Rule 4:50-1, a court may relieve a party from a final judgment for “(a) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;… or (f) any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment or order.” The Rule “`is designed to reconcile the strong interests in finality of judgments and judicial efficiency with the equitable notion that courts should have authority to avoid an unjust result in any given case.”
- As the court held in Schulwitz v. Shuster, 27 N.J.Super. 554, 561, 99 A.2d 845 (App. Div.1953), “[i]t would create a rather anomalous situation if a judgment were to be vacated on the ground of mistake, accident, surprise or excusable neglect, only to discover later that the defendant had no meritorious defense. The time of the courts, counsel and litigants should not be taken up by such a futile proceeding.”
- Defendant has a meritorious defense that can be proven by the evidence she produced in eCourt but was not allowed to present during trial. Therefore, it is imperative to vacate the judgment and allow Defendant’s attorney to present her evidence.
- Defendant applied for Legal Services of New Jersey and had a scheduled appointment on April 7, XXX, at 11:45 am. The Defendant case was referred to Union County Legal Services Corporation and the Defendant is getting legal advice in regard to her case; on what the next steps the Defendant should take in regard to this matter. The Defendant also reached out to Community Health Law Project who assists individuals with mental health, developmental, and physical and disabilities issues that the Defendant currently suffers from and has been taken advantage of in regard to this matter; and the Defendant is waiting to speak with the attorney from their agency who can also help the Defendant in this matter. See letter from Dr. Gregory S. Gallick, Orthopedic Surgeon (See Exhibit B)
- The Defendant is currently under a Section 8 Voucher through the Plainfield Housing Authority, from which the Plaintiff has been receiving payments even though the Defendant has never received a voucher on inspection.
- The Defendant who is pro se and is mental and physical disabled needs more time to prepare for Appeal; and to work with an attorney to help litigate this case and to help the Defendant file the necessary Motions To Show Cause and an Emergency application to the Court to determine if this case needs to be vacated.
- The Defendant also filed a COVID Relief application for the Rental Assistance Program that was sent to Housing Authority of Plainfield and the check was never turned over to the Plaintiff’s on July 7, XXX. The Defendant was advised by the Legal Services of New Jersey to reapplied for program and informed the State of New Jersey that the Plainfield Housing Authority never sent the Plaintiff.
- Defendant is currently required to take refrigerated medicine every Tuesday’s morning and given her severe medical condition and needs time to find an apartment; being locked out will pose serious, harmful health problems. Defendant is also scheduled for upcoming surgery on May 19, XXX.
- This Order needs to be vacated so the Defendant can have a fair chance to have a proper hearing.
REASONS WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant respectfully requests this Honorable Court to GRANT this Motion and set aside the judgment issued on April 5, XXX..
Dated this 14 day of April, XXX
Respectfully Submitted,
________________________________________
Linda Harris,
Defendant in pro se
At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )