Magno, LLC v. Bowden

Under ORS 19.245(2), a defendant may not challenge a default judgment. Under ORS 18.235(7), if a court determines an applicant is entitled to relief, “the court shall issue an order providing that” a money award has been satisfied in full.

In 1999, Bowden had trouble making payments on a space leased from Magno.  Magno obtained a default judgment against Bowden for the rent owing for the full duration of the lease.  Bowden vacated the premises before the end of the lease.  In 2014, the trial court ordered Bowden to make a further payment to Magno to fully satisfy the 1999 judgment.  Bowden made the payment to Magno, which Magno declined to recognize as a full satisfaction of the 1999 judgment.  The trial court issued an order that the 1999 judgment was fully satisfied and awarded attorney’s fees to both parties.  Bowden appealed the trial court’s 2014 order for further payment and the award of attorney’s fees to Magno. Bowden argued that the 1999 judgment could not provide for future payments of rent and his obligation to pay rent ended when he vacated the premises.  Under ORS 19.245(2), a defendant may not challenge a default judgment.  Under ORS 18.235(7), if a court determines an applicant is entitled to relief, “the court shall issue an order providing that” a money award has been satisfied in full.  The Court found that Bowden “lost his opportunity” to challenge the “substantiative underpinnings” of the 1999 judgment, but that Bowden was no longer obligated to pay rent after he vacated the premises.  Thus, the Court reversed the 2014 order requiring further payment from Bowden and the award of attorney’s fees to Magno.  The Court remanded for determination of any amount owed under the 1999 judgment.