Company claims it was never served, appeals default judgment

David Yates Jun. 23, 2009, 4:30am

Arguing that they were unaware of the litigation filed against them, PPI Technology Services is asking appellate justices to dismiss a $20,000 default judgment awarded in favor of Christian Operating Co.

On July 7, the case of PPI Technology Services vs. Christian Operating Co. is set to be submitted on briefs in Texas' Ninth Court of Appeals.

As a third party defendant, Christian Operating sued PPI, alleging PPI failed to pay its subcontractor, Production Enhancement Technology. Production Enhancement had sued Christian Operating in July 2007, alleging the company failed to pay for services rendered.

Court documents show that the three parties became entangled in Production Enhancement Technology's litigation.

However, PPI failed to answer Christian Operating's third party claims, and on Oct. 23, 2008, Judge Bob Wortham of the Jefferson County 58th District Court granted Christian Operating's motion for default judgment, awarding the company $20,000 in actual damages and $9,034 in court costs.

PPI asked the judge for a new trial and was denied, leading the company to file an appeal Jan. 6.

In its appellate brief, PPI argues Judge Wortham erred in granting the motion because PPI "was not properly served with the lawsuit."
PPI claims that one of the company's receptionist mistakenly signed for the suit and the litigation never made its way to any of the company higher ups.

PPI is asking justices to reverse and remand the case so they company can properly be allowed to defend itself against Christian Operating's allegations.

Case Background

Production Enhancement Technology filed a suit against Christian Operating in Jefferson County District Court, alleging it was owed $44,688.60 for services rendered on Sep. 14, 15 and 16, 2006.

According to the suit, Production Enhancement Technology furnished machinery and supplies to Christian Operating in connection with to an oil and gas well it was drilling.

Shortly after the suit was filed, Christian Operating turned and sued PPI, asserting that the company failed to pay its subcontractor, Production Enhancement Technology.

PPI is represented in part by attorneys L. Keith Slade and Lucas Andrew Mauro.

Christian Operating is represented in part by attorneys Dax O. Faubusian and R. Beliveaux.

Trial case No. A179-689
Appeals case No. 09-09-00022CV

More News