I guess it depends on the basis for which she is attempting to overturn the Judgment. At the outset, it seems like she will have a very steep climb.
Rule 4:50-2 states that such relief is not available after one (1) year if it relates to (a), (b), or (c) of Rule 4:50-1 (basically as to mistake, newly discovered evidence, and fraud). There is some caselaw in the comments that mentions that the one year timeline for these is the outermost deadline and that the Court can deny this relief even if a year had not yet elapsed.
If the Order is void ab initio, you might have a better argument under (d).
You could try under (e) for some other reason, but, in my experience, most of the time people attempt (e) arguments it is really a recreation of an argument that should have been brought under (a), (b), or (c).
Good luck, without more info, my gut reaction is this is probably a non-starter.
Gregory Thomlison, Esq.
Kerr & Thomlison, L.L.C.
650 Washington St.
Suite 1C
Toms River, NJ 08753
Ph. (732) 736-8100
Fax: (732) 736-9505
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS E-MAIL MESSAGE IS ATTORNEY-PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAMED ABOVE. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE TO DELIVER TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION ARE STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, Please immediately notify us by telephone or reply to this email. Thank you.