German American Financial Advisors & Trust Co. Ex Rel. Woodward v. Rigsby, 623 F. App'x 806

Plaintiff-appellee German American Financial Advisors & Trust Company, as trustee for the Robert G. Woodward, Sr. Roth IRA, filed a diversity action to enforce a promissory note against defendants Jerry and Mary Rigsby.
The note arose from a 2006 Florida condominium sale financed by the seller, with a 2009 settlement requiring conveyance to Wachovia Bank and a $200,000 note due June 2014 to reflect market value decline, governed by Florida law and with venue in Monroe County, Florida or the Southern District of Indiana.
Wachovia later became Wells Fargo and the note was assigned to German American; the Rigsbys defaulted when the note matured in June 2014.
District court granted unopposed summary judgment and entered default against Mary Rigsby; the court then held both spouses liable for the note.
Mary Rigsby argued lack of personal service to defeat jurisdiction; Jerry argued venue in Indiana based on the Florida settlement's forum clause but did not press broader venue concerns.
The Seventh Circuit affirmed, concluding the Rigsbys waived personal-jurisdiction objections by participating in the summary-judgment briefing and that the undisputed evidence supported judgment for the note.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether service of process was valid to establish personal jurisdiction	Rigsbys were properly served, giving jurisdiction.	Service on Mary Rigsby was improper; service at her door did not satisfy Rule 4(e).	Mary's service was invalid, but waiver occurred through their meritorious participation in briefing.
Whether Mary Rigsby waived objections to personal jurisdiction by seeking extra time to respond	No waiver; consent to merits defense was insufficient.	Her participation in seeking more time signaled a merits defense, waiving jurisdiction objections.	Mary waived personal-jurisdiction objection by joining the merits-focused briefing.
Whether the note was enforceable and the Rigsbys defaulted	Note is valid and unenforced due to nonpayment.	Note defenses were raised but not developed; no challenge to validity or duress proven.	Undisputed evidence supports that the Rigsbys defaulted on a valid note.
Whether the district court properly adjudicated against both spouses despite Mary’s default status	Summary judgment appropriate as against both spouses.	Only Mary would be liable if service was improper.	Court correctly treated as against both spouses given no opposition and valid note.

Mobile Anesthesiologists Chi., LLC v. Anesthesia Assocs. of Houston Metroplex, P.A., 623 F.3d 440 (7th Cir. 2010) (waiver of personal-jurisdiction objections by merits defense participation)
Continental Bank, N.A. v. Meyer, 10 F.3d 1293 (7th Cir. 1993) (merits defense as waiver of jurisdictional objections)
Gerber v. Riordan, 649 F.3d 514 (7th Cir. 2011) (waiver concept and merits-focused litigation)
Timms v. Franks, 953 F.2d 281 (7th Cir. 1992) (district courts may enforce Rule 56 and local rules against pro se litigants)
Patterson v. Indiana Newspapers, Inc., 589 F.3d 357 (7th Cir. 2009) (enforcing Rule 56 and local rules against pro se litigants)
Greer v. Bd. of Educ. of Chi., 267 F.3d 723 (7th Cir. 2001) (enforceability of timely responses under civil-procedure rules)
Swiggett Lumber Const. Co. v. Quandt, 806 N.E.2d 334 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (Indiana service rules allowing mailing when papers are left at residence)
Gibby v. Lindsey, 560 S.E.2d 589 (N.C. Ct. App. 2002) (service at residence considerations under North Carolina law)
Thomison v. IK Indy, Inc., 858 N.E.2d 1052 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (Indiana appellate considerations on service)
Swiggett Lumber Const. Co. v. Quandt, 806 N.E.2d 334 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (duplicate listing for Indiana service rules)