Stribling Equipment, Inc. v. Crager

Summary

The Alabama Supreme Court considered whether a Mississippi judgment could be domesticated and enforced in Alabama after the defendant moved for relief under Rule 60(b)(4). The court held that the defendant waived any challenge to personal jurisdiction by filing answers that did not contest jurisdiction, and that service of the default-judgment motion on his attorney satisfied due process. The court reversed the order setting aside domestication of the Mississippi judgment and remanded.

Holdings

1. Under Mississippi law, Crager's voluntary filing of answers constituted an appearance, and his failure to assert lack of personal jurisdiction in those answers waived that defense, even if the answers were later stricken for a technical reason.
2. Service of the motion for default judgment and hearing notice on Crager's attorney of record satisfied Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b), Rule 55(b), and due process.
3. The Mississippi judgment was not void because the Mississippi court had personal jurisdiction over Crager and did not act inconsistently with due process; therefore, the Alabama order setting aside domestication of the judgment was erroneous.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Crager's voluntary filing of answers in the Mississippi action constituted an appearance and waived his defense of lack of personal jurisdiction, even if the answers were later stricken.
2. Whether service of the motion for default judgment and notice of hearing on Crager's attorney of record satisfied Mississippi procedural and due-process requirements.
3. Whether the Mississippi judgment was void and therefore subject to being set aside under Alabama Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(4).

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded