Mid-Continent Wood Products v. Harris

Lawrence Harris (defendant) never paid Mid-Continent Wood Products (Mid-Continent) (plaintiff) for lumber, leading Mid-Continent to obtain a default judgment and later execute a promissory note with Harris instead of collecting on it. When Harris also failed to pay the note, Mid-Continent tried repeatedly but never succeeded in properly serving him in a new collection action; six years later, after locating some of Harris's assets, Mid-Continent tried to execute on the earlier default judgment. Harris moved to vacate the judgment for lack of proper service, but the district court applied its own three-part test — asking whether Harris had actual knowledge of the suit, whether Mid-Continent diligently tried to serve him, and whether equity favored an exception — and denied his motion; Harris appealed.