Cecil E. Cameron v. Laythron Tillis and Ethel Tillis

Summary

The Supreme Court of Alabama held that a default judgment against Cecil E. Cameron was void because service by publication was invalid. At the time publication began, Alabama Rule of Civil Procedure 4.3 permitted such service only for resident defendants, and the amended rule allowing service on nonresident defendants had not yet taken effect. The court reversed and remanded, concluding that Cameron was entitled to relief from the default judgment.

Holdings

1. Because the service-by-publication order was entered before the August 1, 2004 amendment deleting the resident-defendant limitation, publication against a nonresident defendant was invalid for the first two publication dates, July 22 and July 29, 2004.
2. Service was not validly published for four consecutive weeks because the first two publications were invalid under the version of Rule 4.3(c) applicable at the time.
3. Because Cameron was not properly served, the trial court lacked personal jurisdiction over him and the default judgment was void; Cameron was therefore entitled to relief from the judgment.

Questions Presented

1. Whether service by publication on Cameron was authorized under the version of Alabama Rule of Civil Procedure 4.3(c) in effect when the service began.
2. Whether the failure to complete four consecutive weeks of valid publication rendered service invalid and deprived the trial court of personal jurisdiction.
3. Whether the resulting default judgment was void and therefore had to be set aside.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded