Court Opinion

ID: 7755027
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-30 20:26:12.354433+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:40:28.131894
License: Public Domain

I concur. The trial court entered a judgment in favor of the Wrights on their declaratory judgment action. This judgment was, in effect, a default judgment erroneously entered against Cimarron for its failure to file a counterclaim, even though it had filed a properly supported motion for summary judgment. A default judgment would have been appropriate only if Cimarron had "failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided by these rules." Rule 55(a), Ala.R.Civ.P. While Cimarron refused to plead with a counterclaim, it did "otherwise defend as provided by these rules" by filing the motion for summary judgment as authorized by Rule 56(b), Ala.R.Civ.P., which provides, in pertinent part: "A party against whom a . . . declaratory judgment is sought may, at any time, move with or without supporting affidavits for a summary judgment in the party's favor as to all or any part thereof." (Emphasis added.) Therefore, the trial court erred to reversal in entering a judgment against Cimarron.