What are the statutes regarding litigation after default judgment?

Once a party's default has been entered, that party can't defend itself anymore. The litigation doesn't end, but the defendant's right to participate in it, unless and until they vacate the default, does end. See C.C.P. section 585. This fact pattern is bizarre. The clerk shouldn't have accepted any filings from this party after their default (even before you turned it into a default judgment). But it sounds like this party wantd to defend the case, and that they will seek to vacate it, and those motions are almost always granted. Hire a litigator. This is about to get even more complicated. Disclaimer: Please note that this answer does not constitute legal advice, and should not be relied on, since each state has different laws, each situation is fact specific, and it is impossible to evaluate a legal problem without a comprehensive consultation and review of all the facts and documents at issue. This answer does not create an attorney-client relationship.

You need to find out if the default judgment was "entered"...was it a clerk's default or was there a prove-up hearing before a judge? Was the default entered as a sanction against defendant for failure to obey a court order compelling the discovery? These are all issues an attorney would need to understand before being able to assess your problem. If the default was already entered when the clerk accepted the papers from the defaulted defendant regarding the discovery motion and there was no accompanying motion for relief from default (with which you would have had to have been served), then the clerk made an error in accepting the discovery opposition papers filed by the defendant. Was there a motion to set aside default judgment filed in a timely manner (normally within 6 months of entry of default). Was notice of entry of default served on all parties? Normally, once a default is entered, discretionary relief can only be granted if the defendant moves within a reasonable time not to exceed six months. Certain instances provide for mandatory relief from a default (e.g., attorney affidavit of fault). Here are some cases that may be helpful to you - examples of inexcusable neglect are: Relief from default was properly denied where counsel failed to produce requested documents after having received four extensions of time and despite two court orders compelling production. Counsel also failed to appear at two court hearings, the last of which resulted in dismissal of the action. [Elston v. City of Turlock (1985) 38 Cal.3d 227, 236, 211 Cal.Rptr. 416, 421-422] Relief from default not justified on the ground that defense counsel erroneously believed the case was moot, and that no answer was necessary (resulting in case being placed in "inactive" file). [Jackson v. Bank of America (1983) 141 Cal.App.3d 55, 58, 190 Cal.Rptr. 78, 80] Delay in the mails by itself not "good cause" for relief; it is counsel's duty to seek an extension of time. [See Mannino v. Sup.Ct. (Southern Calif. Edison Co.) (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 776, 778, 191 Cal.Rptr. 163, 164] Also, the default and default judgment are separate procedures, and relief may be granted from the judgment only--leaving the default in effect. [Rutan v. Summit Sports, Inc., (1985) 173 Cal.App.3d at 970. You need to meet with an attorney and bring your file so they can review the procedural status of the case to see what occurred and what relief to seek. Disclaimer: Please note that this answer does not constitute legal advice, and should not be relied on, since each state has different laws, each situation is fact specific, and it is impossible to evaluate a legal problem without a comprehensive legal consultation and review of all the facts and documents at issue. This answer does not constitute an attorney-client relationship.

In addition, you should also note that: Timeliness: There is no time limit on a collateral attack on a void judgment (other than possibly the equitable defense of laches): "A judgment void on its face . . . is subject to collateral attack at any time." [Rochin v. Pat Johnson Mfg. Co. (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 1228, 1239, 79 Cal.Rptr.2d 719, 725--amended judgment entered without notice to plaintiff violated due process] Nor is there any time limit on a motion for relief under Ca Civ Pro § 473 where it is clear from the face of the record that the judgment should not have been entered: "(A) default that is void on the face of the record when entered is subject to challenge at any time irrespective of lack of diligence in seeking to set it aside within the six-month period of section 473." [Plotitsa v. Sup.Ct. (Kadri) (1983) 140 Cal.App.3d 755, 761, 189 Cal.Rptr. 769, 772 (emphasis added)--Ca Civ Pro § 425.11 statement of damages not personally served on defendant] A void judgment must be set aside regardless of the merits of the underlying case. Thus, for example, where there was never valid service of summons, the court cannot insist that defendant show a meritorious defense before setting aside the judgment: "Where a person has been deprived of property in a manner contrary to the most basic tenets of due process, it is no answer to say that in his particular case due process of law would have led to the same result because he had no adequate defense upon the merits." [Peralta v. Heights Medical Center, Inc. (1988) 485 U.S. 80, 86-87, 108 S.Ct. 896, 900 (internal quotes omitted)] The result is different where the judgment is merely voidable because of "extrinsic fraud or mistake." In such cases, a meritorious defense must be shown. Disclaimer: Please note that this answer does not constitute legal advice, and should not be relied on, since each state has different laws, each situation is fact specific, and it is impossible to evaluate a legal problem without a comprehensive legal consultation and review of all the facts and documents at issue. This answer does not constitute an attorney-client relationship.