Wooden
Wooden v. Wooden CA2/7
Opinion
Opinion
Segal, J.
INTRODUCTION
Andrea Wooden sued her sister, Sharon Wooden, her brother-in-law, Isaac 1 Richard, and her nephew, Isaac Richard III (“Tre”), alleging twelve causes of action. After Sharon, Isaac, and Tre failed to respond to the complaint, the trial court entered their defaults and subsequently entered a $300,000 default judgment against them. Sharon, Isaac, and Tre moved to vacate the defaults and the default judgment. The trial court denied their motion. Sharon, Isaac, and Tre appeal. We affirm the order denying the motion by Isaac and reverse the order denying the motion by Sharon and Tre.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Andrea, Sharon, and Charlene Kobrine are sisters. Sharon and Kobrine are practicing attorneys. Andrea graduated from law school but is not licensed to practice law. In 2004 the three sisters inherited an apartment building previously owned by their mother. Andrea resided in the apartment building, although Sharon claims Andrea has never paid rent. The family has been involved in internecine litigation over the apartment building since 2008.
A. The Underlying Action Andrea, representing herself, filed this action against Sharon, Isaac, Tre, and 2…