Setting aside a federal default: two standards, and which one you get depends on timing

Rule 55(c) is one sentence long and it decides how hard your problem is:

The court may set aside an entry of default for good cause, and it may set aside a final default judgment under Rule 60(b).

Two clauses, two standards. Which one applies turns on whether a judgment has been entered — not on how bad your excuse is, not on how much money is at stake.

Why the distinction is the whole ballgame

Rule 55 separates default into two steps that people routinely merge.

Entry of default — Rule 55(a). When a party "has failed to plead or otherwise defend, and that failure is shown by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk must enter the party's default." That is a docket entry. Nothing is owed yet.

Default judgment — Rule 55(b). A separate act. The clerk may enter it only where the claim is for a sum certain or a sum that can be made certain by computation, on the plaintiff's request with a supporting affidavit, against a defendant who was defaulted for not appearing and who is neither a minor nor an incompetent person. In every other case the party must apply to the court.

Between those two steps sits the cheapest relief in the rule. "Good cause" under Rule 55(c) has no enumerated grounds, no time limit written into the rule, and no one-year ceiling. After the judgment, everything runs through Rule 60(b), which has all three.

The practical consequence: if default has been entered and judgment has not, the clock is the thing that matters most.

What Rule 55(b)(2) gives a defendant who has appeared

Two protections worth checking before assuming a judgment was properly entered.

Seven days' notice. "If the party against whom a default judgment is sought has appeared personally or by a representative, that party or its representative must be served with written notice of the application at least 7 days before the hearing."

Appearing is a lower bar than answering. A defendant who did something in the case — but not the right thing, or not in time — may still be entitled to that notice.

A hearing where one is needed. The court "may conduct hearings or make referrals — preserving any federal statutory right to a jury trial — when, to enter or effectuate judgment, it needs to: conduct an accounting; determine the amount of damages; establish the truth of any allegation by evidence; or investigate any other matter."

Rule 55(d) adds that a default judgment may be entered against the United States, its officers or its agencies "only if the claimant establishes a claim or right to relief by evidence that satisfies the court."

Rule 60(b): six grounds

On motion and just terms, the court may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons:

1. mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; 2. newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b); 3. fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party; 4. the judgment is void; 5. the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or 6. any other reason that justifies relief.

For a defaulting defendant, (1), (4) and (6) do most of the work. Ground (1) is the ordinary route. Ground (4) is for a judgment entered without jurisdiction — including where service was never valid. Ground (6) is a residual clause, and courts read it narrowly precisely because it has no time limit.

The timing rule has two parts, and both bind

Rule 60(c)(1):

A motion under Rule 60(b) must be made within a reasonable time — and for reasons (1), (2), and (3) no more than a year after the entry of the judgment or order or the date of the proceeding.

Grounds (1), (2) and (3) carry both limits. A motion at eleven months can still fail as unreasonable. Grounds (4), (5) and (6) carry only the reasonable-time requirement — no one-year cap.

That asymmetry is the reason the ground you choose matters as much as the facts. Excusable neglect at fourteen months is out of time. A void judgment at fourteen months is not.

Two things a Rule 60(b) motion does not do

Rule 60(c)(2): "The motion does not affect the judgment's finality or suspend its operation."

Filing it does not stay enforcement. Garnishment, levy and execution continue unless the court stays them, and that is a separate request.

Rule 6(b)(2) is the other one: a court "must not extend the time to act under" Rules 50(b) and (d), 52(b), 59(b), (d) and (e), and 60(b). The one-year limit is not extendable, by the court or by agreement.

Powers Rule 60 doesn't limit

Rule 60(d) preserves three routes that sit outside subdivision (b):

1. an independent action to relieve a party from a judgment, order or proceeding;
2. relief under 28 U.S.C. § 1655 to a defendant who was not personally notified of the action;
3. setting aside a judgment for fraud on the court.

None of those carries the one-year limit. Rule 60(e) abolishes what they replaced: bills of review, bills in the nature of bills of review, and the writs of coram nobis, coram vobis and audita querela.

Clerical mistakes are a different provision

Rule 60(a): the court may correct a clerical mistake, or a mistake arising from oversight or omission, found in a judgment, order or other part of the record — on motion or on its own, with or without notice. After an appeal has been docketed and while it is pending, such a mistake may be corrected only with the appellate court's leave.

Rule 60(a) is for making the record say what the court actually did. It is not a route to change what the court decided.

How the two standards compare

What "good cause" and "excusable neglect" require

Neither phrase is defined in the rules. Federal courts apply multi-factor tests — typically weighing whether the default was wilful, whether the plaintiff would be prejudiced, and whether a meritorious defence is presented, with the standard applied more liberally to an entry of default than to a judgment. Those tests come from case law, and the circuits do not phrase them identically. This site publishes the rules rather than the decisions construing them, so the framework above is where our coverage stops.

What the rules do tell you is the shape of the problem: move before judgment if you can, pick the ground deliberately, and watch the year.

Where these rules live

• Rule 4 — Summons
• Rule 6 — Computing and Extending Time
• Rule 12 — Defenses and Objections
• Rule 55 — Default; Default Judgment
• Rule 59 — New Trial; Altering or Amending a Judgment
• Rule 60 — Relief from a Judgment or Order

This page explains what the rules say. It isn't legal advice, and what counts as good cause or excusable neglect is decided under case law this site doesn't cover.