Foreclosure; Motion to set aside a default; MCR 2.603(D)(1); “Good cause”

Concluding that the trial court did not err in refusing to set aside the default, the court affirmed. “The case originated in the circuit court with plaintiff’s complaint seeking a foreclosure judgment on a real estate granted mortgage by” defendant-Green. She argued “that the trial court erred in refusing to set aside the default and that [she] ‘did not know’ that she was required to file an answer or otherwise respond. [She] also claimed that ‘mortgage fraud’ was her meritorious defense.” The court concluded that as “the trial court meticulously explained in its opinion, defendant has failed to show good cause or, for that matter, a meritorious defense.” Her appellate argument was “devoted to injustices perpetrated upon her by plaintiff or those in association with plaintiff. It neither addresses the factors of irregularity in the proceeding below nor provides a reasonable excuse for the failure to timely file an answer. Nor, for that matter, does it demonstrate a manifest injustice would result if the default is not set aside. Indeed, if anything, the default judgment works to defendant’s advantage, at least with respect to the current litigation.” The court noted that “Count I was dismissed outright. While it potentially allows plaintiff to take action in the future that is adverse to defendant’s interests, in the context of the matter before us, it is to defendant’s advantage to have a count dismissed.” Similarly, as “to Count II, the prior foreclosure and Sheriff’s Deed were set aside. Again, [in] the current context, that is to defendant’s advantage. In short, [her] argument, while perhaps relevant to other litigation involving this property, it is not relevant to this particular matter.” As for her claim “that she should have been granted summary disposition and awarded damages, there was no motion for summary disposition filed. Again, this might be an issue relevant in other litigation, but it is not relevant here.”