Ex parte Slocumb Law Firm, LLC, [Ms. 2190297, Mar. 13, 2020] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. Civ. App. 2020). The
court (Thompson, P.J.; Moore, Edwards, and Hanson, JJ., concur; Donaldson,
J., recuses) denies the Slocumb Law Firm’s petition for a writ of
mandamus directing the Tuscaloosa Circuit Court to vacate its order compelling
Slocumb to respond to post-judgment interrogatories. The court holds that
the post-judgment discovery was collateral to Slocumb’s appeal of
the default judgment. Ms. *11, citing
Vesta Fire Ins. Corp. v. Liberty National Life Ins. Co., 992 So. 2d 1252, 1259 (Ala. 2008). Consequently, the trial court did
not abuse its discretion in ordering Slocumb to respond to the discovery.
Ibid.
The court emphatically rejected Slocumb’s argument that responding
to the discovery would waive his appeal asserting insufficiency of service
of process. “Neither the filing of a general appearance, nor the
taking of a position looking to the merits, prevents a party from attacking
the jurisdiction of the court
or the service of process.” Ms. *11 (emphasis added by
Ex parte Slocumb), quoting Committee Comments on 1973 adoption of Rule 12, Ala. R. Civ. P.