The Wolf Organization, Inc. v. TNG Contractors, LLC, M2018-00073-COA-R3-CV

Wolf (Pennsylvania creditor) obtained a prothonotary-entered default judgment in Pennsylvania against TNG (Tennessee LLC) for unpaid invoices after TNG failed to answer.
TNG filed a petition to open the default judgment in Pennsylvania with a proposed answer claiming defective goods, but did not assert lack of personal jurisdiction; the petition was denied and an appeal failed.
Wolf registered and sought enforcement of the Pennsylvania judgment in Davidson County, Tennessee under the Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act (UEFJA).
TNG first raised lack of personal jurisdiction in the Tennessee enforcement action and served requests for admission asserting Pennsylvania courts lacked jurisdiction; Wolf’s responses were late.
Tennessee trial court found TNG waived its jurisdictional defense under Pennsylvania procedure and granted Wolf summary judgment enforcing the foreign judgment; the court denied Wolf’s later request to supplement the judgment with post-judgment attorney’s fees and costs.
On appeal, the Tennessee Court of Appeals affirmed: TNG waived the personal-jurisdiction defense in the Pennsylvania action, and the UEFJA enforcement action could not be used to obtain additional post-judgment attorney’s fees.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Wolf)	Defendant's Argument (TNG)	Held
Whether Pennsylvania court had personal jurisdiction over TNG	TNG waived any jurisdictional objection by failing to raise it in the Pennsylvania proceedings	Pennsylvania courts lacked both specific and general jurisdiction over TNG; defense preserved for enforcement action	Court: TNG waived the defense by not raising it in preliminary objections/petition to open in Pennsylvania; enforcement affirmed
Whether Wolf’s late responses to requests for admission caused conclusive admissions that Pennsylvania lacked jurisdiction	Wolf argued TNG waived relying on the untimely Rule 36 admissions by not timely pursuing them	TNG argued Wolf’s failure to respond within 30 days meant facts (including lack of jurisdiction) were conclusively admitted	Court: TNG waived reliance on the requests for admission by waiting and not timely raising the issue in court; admissions not treated as conclusive here
Whether Wolf can recover post-judgment attorney’s fees and costs in the Tennessee enforcement action under UEFJA	Wolf argued credit agreement entitled it to collection costs and fees, and sought to supplement the registered judgment for fees incurred after March 1, 2016	TNG opposed supplementation in the enforcement proceeding	Court: Denied—UEFJA enforcement action does not authorize awarding additional post-judgment fees; Wolf should have sought fees in the original Pennsylvania proceedings

Tennessee Dep’t of Human Servs. v. Barbee, 714 S.W.2d 263 (Tenn. 1986) (failure to bring Rule 36 admissions to court’s attention can waive reliance)
Four Seasons Gardening & Landscaping, Inc. v. Crouch, 688 S.W.2d 439 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1984) (judgments issued without personal jurisdiction are not entitled to full faith and credit)
Biogen Distributors, Inc. v. Tanner, 842 S.W.2d 253 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1992) (burden on party attacking foreign judgment; procedural posture for summary judgment review)
Cintas Corp. v. Lee’s Cleaning Servs., Inc., 700 A.2d 915 (Pa. 1997) (distinction between petition to strike and petition to open default judgment)
Samuel-Bassett v. Kia Motors Am., Inc., 34 A.3d 1 (Pa. 2011) (petition for attorneys’ fees is ancillary; trial court retains authority after entry of judgment)