Benjamin Larkin, Jr., individually and d/b/a Larkin Fine Furniture v. Branch Banking and Trust Company

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

REL: 7/27/12 Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o f o r m a l r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 36104-3741 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may be made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS SPECIAL TERM, 2012 2110416 Benjamin L a r k i n , J r . , i n d i v i d u a l l y and d/b/a L a r k i n Fine Furniture v. Branch Banking and T r u s t Company Appeal from Montgomery C i r c u i t (CV-11-900898) Court BRYAN, J u d g e . B e n j a m i n L a r k i n , J r . , i n d i v i d u a l l y a n d d/b/a L a r k i n F i n e Furniture set aside ("Larkin"), appeals a default judgment from t h e d e n i a l o f a motion t o entered i n favor of Branch 2110416 B a n k i n g and T r u s t Company On J u l y 15, 2011, ("BB&T"). We r e v e r s e and BB&T s u e d L a r k i n , a l l e g i n g n e g l i g e n c e , wantonness, u n j u s t enrichment, money The lent, money had r e c o r d on a p p e a l indicating complaint motion that received, claims of breach of c o n t r a c t , and misrepresentation. c o n t a i n s a s i g n e d r e t u r n - o n - s e r v i c e form Larkin on J u l y 18, f o r an and remand. entry was 2011. of served with On A u g u s t 24, d e f a u l t and the summons 2011, a motion and BB&T f i l e d for a a default judgment. On A u g u s t 26, 2011, appearance complaint i n the on a c t i o n by the arbitration. ground Although motion to dismiss motion failure to to L a r k i n , a c t i n g p r o s e , made h i s and dismiss as under filing that the an the a n s w e r , i t was, Rule 12(b), on A u g u s t 30, 2011, Ala. relief R. default C i v . P., i n the judgment stated p r e v i o u s l y been e n t e r e d , is motion both a see R u l e 2 to as a i n substance, a R. Civ. can P., be to Rule amount o f $ 8 4 , 9 8 4 . 5 3 . that the subject 5 5 ( a ) , A l a . R. entered 55(b)(2), Although default against for granted. the t r i a l c o u r t a d e f a u l t judgment a g a i n s t L a r k i n , p u r s u a n t Ala. to dismiss dispute Larkin styled s t a t e a c l a i m upon w h i c h Four days l a t e r , a motion first the Larkin had C i v . P., and 2110416 d i s c u s s i o n , i n f r a , t h e r e c o r d does n o t s u p p o r t t h a t s t a t e m e n t . On S e p t e m b e r 23, 2011, L a r k i n f i l e d a motion to set aside the d e f a u l t j u d g m e n t , p u r s u a n t t o R u l e 5 5 ( c ) , A l a . R. C i v . P. motion to operation Larkin, set of aside law, the default pursuant to judgment Rule was 59.1, A l a . R. denied and t h a t c o u r t t r a n s f e r r e d t h e a p p e a l t o t h i s c o u r t , On trial had appeal, pursuant 1975. L a r k i n argues, the motion P. court, among o t h e r things, that c o u r t e r r e d i n e n t e r i n g a d e f a u l t judgment a f t e r filed by Civ. a c t i n g p r o s e , t i m e l y a p p e a l e d t o t h e supreme t o § 1 2 - 2 - 7 ( 6 ) , A l a . Code The to dismiss. Because we the Larkin conclude L a r k i n c o u l d n o t have b e e n i n d e f a u l t upon f i l i n g t h e that motion t o d i s m i s s , we a g r e e t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t e r r e d i n e n t e r i n g a default judgment. Initially, "'[w]e determination judgments.'" 506 of Finest cases on that the our merits, policy C i v . App. Chocolate (quoting 1979), Co., D i a l v. S t a t e , citing 349 So. i n turn 2d favors disfavoring P r o g r e s s I n d u s . , I n c . v. W i l s o n , ( A l a . 2010) (Ala. note 374 2d 361, C o c k r e l l v. 1117, default 52 So. 3d So. 1120 500, 362 World's (Ala. ( o v e r r u l e d on o t h e r g r o u n d s by Ex p a r t e K e i t h , 771 So. 2d 3 the 1977) 1018 2110416 (Ala. 1998))). procedure Rule 55, A l a . R. C i v . P., f o r o b t a i n i n g a d e f a u l t judgment. provides the R u l e 55 p r o v i d e s , in pertinent part: "(a) E n t r y . When a p a r t y a g a i n s t whom a j u d g m e n t f o r a f f i r m a t i v e r e l i e f i s sought has f a i l e d t o p l e a d or o t h e r w i s e d e f e n d as p r o v i d e d by t h e s e R u l e s and that fact i s made t o a p p e a r b y a f f i d a v i t o r otherwise, the clerk shall enter the party's default. The c l e r k ' s e n t r y o f d e f a u l t may be made electronically. "(b) Judgment. e n t e r e d as f o l l o w s : Judgment by default may "(1) By the Clerk. When the p l a i n t i f f ' s c l a i m against a defendant i s f o r a sum c e r t a i n o r f o r a sum w h i c h c a n b y c o m p u t a t i o n be made c e r t a i n , t h e c l e r k upon r e q u e s t o f t h e p l a i n t i f f a n d upon a f f i d a v i t o f t h e amount due s h a l l e n t e r j u d g m e n t f o r that amount and costs against the defendant, i f the defendant has been d e f a u l t e d f o r f a i l u r e t o appear and i f t h e defendant i s not a minor o r incompetent person. "(2) By t h e C o u r t . I n a l l o t h e r c a s e s t h e p a r t y e n t i t l e d t o a judgment b y d e f a u l t s h a l l a p p l y t o t h e c o u r t t h e r e f o r ; b u t no j u d g m e n t b y d e f a u l t s h a l l be e n t e r e d (A) against a minor, or (B) a g a i n s t an incompetent person, u n l e s s the minor o r t h e incompetent person i s represented i n the a c t i o n by a g e n e r a l guardian or other r e p r e s e n t a t i v e as p r o v i d e d i n R u l e 1 7 ( c ) [ , A l a . R. C i v . P.,] who h a s a p p e a r e d t h e r e i n . I f t h e p a r t y a g a i n s t whom j u d g m e n t b y d e f a u l t i s sought has appeared i n t h e a c t i o n , t h e p a r t y ( o r , i f a p p e a r i n g by 4 be 2110416 representative, the party's representative) s h a l l be s e r v e d w i t h w r i t t e n n o t i c e o f t h e a p p l i c a t i o n f o r j u d g m e n t a t l e a s t t h r e e (3) days prior to the hearing on such application, provided, however, that j u d g m e n t b y d e f a u l t may be e n t e r e d b y t h e c o u r t on t h e d a y t h e c a s e i s s e t f o r t r i a l w i t h o u t s u c h t h r e e (3) d a y s n o t i c e . I f , i n o r d e r t o e n a b l e t h e c o u r t t o e n t e r judgment or t o c a r r y i t i n t o e f f e c t , i t i s necessary to t a k e an a c c o u n t o r t o d e t e r m i n e t h e amount o f damages o r t o e s t a b l i s h t h e t r u t h o f any a v e r m e n t b y e v i d e n c e o r t o make an i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f any o t h e r m a t t e r , the c o u r t may c o n d u c t s u c h h e a r i n g s o r o r d e r s u c h r e f e r e n c e s as i t deems n e c e s s a r y and p r o p e r and s h a l l a c c o r d a r i g h t o f t r i a l by j u r y pursuant t o the p r o v i s i o n s of Rule 3 8 [ , A l a . R. C i v . P . ] . " Thus, u n d e r R u l e 5 5 ( a ) , a p a r t y i s s u b j e c t t o an e n t r y o f default by t h e c l e r k i f t h e p a r t y otherwise defend." Upon the n o n d e f a u l t i n g p a r t y may s e c u r e 55(b)(1) or (2). default In t h i s on A u g u s t "has f a i l e d entry of to plead default, case, 24, 2 0 1 1 . BB&T moved f o r an e n t r y o f However, t h e r e c o r d a motion t o dismiss on A u g u s t 26, 2 0 1 1 . whether filing entry of default, the motion "otherwise t h u s p r e c l u d i n g an e n t r y the a d e f a u l t judgment u n d e r R u l e does n o t e s t a b l i s h that the c l e r k entered a d e f a u l t before Larkin L a r k i n , by or Thus, t h e i s s u e i s to dismiss defend[ed]" before under Rule o f d e f a u l t and a d e f a u l t 5 filed an 55(a), judgment. 2110416 I n o t h e r w o r d s , we to default a f t e r This sued her motion to filed the motion to addressed So. a wife process filing court C o r c o r a n , 353 must d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r L a r k i n was 2d 805 such a situation lack personal of in 1978) . husband f o r a d i v o r c e . asserting and dismiss. ( A l a . C i v . App. dismiss, The The trial jurisdiction, and court the concluded wife that appealed. of service The wife a r g u e d , among o t h e r t h i n g s , t h a t t h e t r i a l appeal, personal is clear ... challenged This court disagreed, t h a t the the filing jurisdiction e n t r y of a d e f a u l t before by entered stating that " [ i ] t of the motion to d i s m i s s , of the wife erred n o t e n t e r i n g a d e f a u l t judgment a f t e r t h e h u s b a n d had a motion to d i s m i s s . of court the c o u r t had a then trial i t lacked On v. husband f i l e d insufficiency jurisdiction. Corcoran In Corcoran, a m o t i o n f o r a d e f a u l t judgment, w h i c h the denied. subject which court, would preclude the the d i s p o s i t i o n of the motion. See N a t i o n a l D i s t i l l e r s P r o d u c t s C o r p o r a t i o n v. H i n d e c h , 10 F.R.D. 229 (D.C. Colo. v. Barbee, 624 1950)." So. 2d 645 353 So. 2d a t 809. ( A l a . C i v . App. See 1993) a l s o Barbee (indicating t h a t a m o t i o n c h a l l e n g i n g venue w o u l d p r e v e n t a d e f e n d a n t f r o m being in default). 6 2110416 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 55(a) and (b), which g o v e r n t h e e n t r i e s o f d e f a u l t and d e f a u l t j u d g m e n t i n f e d e r a l courts, are particular, provides similar to Federal Rule Alabama Rules 55(a), like 55(a) and Alabama (b). Rule t h a t the f a i l u r e "to p l e a d or o t h e r w i s e the term "otherwise defend" 55(a), defend" i s a p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r an e n t r y o f d e f a u l t by t h e c l e r k . federal rules, In Under the includes "the a s s e r t i o n of those defenses t h a t , under Rule 1 2 ( b ) , [ F e d . R. C i v . P.,] may be made by m o t i o n r a t h e r than i n the p l e a d i n g s . These defenses i n c l u d e c h a l l e n g e s to s u b j e c t m a t t e r or p e r s o n a l j u r i s d i c t i o n , v e n u e , and s u f f i c i e n c y o f p r o c e s s o r s e r v i c e of p r o c e s s ; motions t o d i s m i s s f o r f a i l u r e t o s t a t e a c l a i m on w h i c h r e l i e f may be g r a n t e d ; and motions r a i s i n g the i s s u e of f a i l u r e to j o i n a p a r t y u n d e r R u l e 19 [ F e d . R. C i v . P . ] . A party who i n t e r p o s e s one o f t h e s e d e f e n s e s , e v e n t h o u g h t h e p a r t y has n o t s e r v e d a r e s p o n s i v e p l e a d i n g , i s n o t in default." 10 J . Moore, M o o r e ' s F e d e r a l P r a c t i c e § 5 5 . 1 1 [ 2 ] [ b ] [ i ] 2012) (footnote omitted). & M. Kane, F e d e r a l ("The words See a l s o 10A P r a c t i c e and 'otherwise C. Procedure: defend' r e f e r to the W r i g h t , A. Civil 3d (3d ed. Miller § interposition v a r i o u s c h a l l e n g e s t o s u c h m a t t e r s as s e r v i c e , v e n u e , and s u f f i c i e n c y o f t h e p r i o r p l e a d i n g , any a default pleading.") i f pursued in the of which might absence of a of the prevent responsive ( f o o t n o t e o m i t t e d ) ; and B a s s v. H o a g l a n d , 172 7 2682 F.2d 2110416 205, to 210 ( 5 t h C i r . 1949) ("The words ' o t h e r w i s e attacks on t h e s e r v i c e , better particulars, without In t h i s case, before on the arbitration. ground motion, Larkin was or f o r default to the m e r i t s . " ) . an e n t r y o f d e f a u l t , L a r k i n moved t o that the dispute thus defend[ed]" subject precluding not subject an e n t r y to default of d e f a u l t . and because against no e n t r y of i t follows that the Larkin. court We erred i n entering reverse the d e f a u l t reversing pretermit t h e judgment judgment t h e j u d g m e n t , and we remand t h e case f o r p r o c e e d i n g s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h i s o p i n i o n . on Because c o u r t e r r e d by e n t e r i n g a d e f a u l t judgment. The t r i a l are to under Rule 55(a) by f i l i n g d e f a u l t c o u l d have p r o p e r l y b e e n e n t e r e d , trial is B a s e d on t h e f o r e g o i n g a u t h o r i t i e s , we c o n c l u d e that L a r k i n "otherwise his to dismiss, w h i c h may p r e v e n t and t h e l i k e , presently pleading dismiss or motions defend' r e f e r on d i s c u s s i o n of the other the foregoing B e c a u s e we ground, arguments r a i s e d by L a r k i n appeal. REVERSED AND REMANDED. Thompson, P . J . , a n d P i t t m a n a n d Thomas, J J . , c o n c u r . Moore, J . , c o n c u r s i n t h e r e s u l t , w i t h o u t w r i t i n g . 8 we

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.