Default Judgment - Kirtland Factors
Putnam County Mem. Hosp. v. TruBridge, LLC and Evident, LLC, [Ms. 1171062, May 10, 2019] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. 2019). The Court (Mendheim, J.; Parker, C.J., and Shaw, Bryan, and Sellers, JJ., concur; Mitchell recuses) sets aside a default judgment entered by the Mobile Circuit Court.
The circuit court’s order denying the motion to set aside the default judgment “did not include a discussion of the Kirtland [v. Fort Morgan Authority Sewer Service, Inc., 524 So. 600 (Ala. 1988)] factors ...” Ms. *9. The plaintiff argued that because the Supreme Court “conducts a de novo review when a motion to set aside a default judgment is denied by operation of law under Rule 59.1, Ala. R. Civ. P., ... it should not ‘treat orders that deny motions to set aside a default judgment without discussing the Kirtland factors’ any differently.” Ms. *9-10. The Court rejected this argument, holding that where a motion to set aside a default judgment is denied by entry of an order, a de novo review is not appropriate. Ms. *12.