Preview:

REL: 10/29/10

Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions,
Alabama Appellate Courts, 300 Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama 36104-3741 ((334) 229-0649), of any typographical or other errors, in order that corrections may be made before the opinion is printed in Southern Reporter.
ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011
2080992
Mark Ryder v.
James F. Mabry
Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court (CV-07-2614)
On Application for Rehearing
BRYAN, Judge.
The opinion of March 12, 2010, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor.
Mark Ryder, the defendant below, appeals from a default



REL: 10/29/10

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.
ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011
2080992
Mark Ryder v.
James F. Mabry
Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court (CV-07-2614)
On Application for Rehearing
BRYAN, Judge.
The opinion of March 12, 2010, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor.
Mark Ryder, the defendant below, appeals from a default



REL: 10/29/10

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.
ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011
2080992
Mark Ryder v.
James F. Mabry
Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court (CV-07-2614)
On Application for Rehearing
BRYAN, Judge.
The opinion of March 12, 2010, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor.
Mark Ryder, the defendant below, appeals from a default



REL: 10/29/10

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.
ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011
2080992
Mark Ryder v.
James F. Mabry
Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court (CV-07-2614)
On Application for Rehearing
BRYAN, Judge.
The opinion of March 12, 2010, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor.
Mark Ryder, the defendant below, appeals from a default



REL: 10/29/10

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.
ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011
2080992
Mark Ryder v.
James F. Mabry
Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court (CV-07-2614)
On Application for Rehearing
BRYAN, Judge.
The opinion of March 12, 2010, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor.
Mark Ryder, the defendant below, appeals from a default



REL: 10/29/10

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.
ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011
2080992
Mark Ryder v.
James F. Mabry
Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court (CV-07-2614)
On Application for Rehearing
BRYAN, Judge.
The opinion of March 12, 2010, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor.
Mark Ryder, the defendant below, appeals from a default



REL: 10/29/10

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.
ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011
2080992
Mark Ryder v.
James F. Mabry
Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court (CV-07-2614)
On Application for Rehearing
BRYAN, Judge.
The opinion of March 12, 2010, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor.
Mark Ryder, the defendant below, appeals from a default



REL: 10/29/10

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.
ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011
2080992
Mark Ryder v.
James F. Mabry
Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court (CV-07-2614)
On Application for Rehearing
BRYAN, Judge.
The opinion of March 12, 2010, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor.
Mark Ryder, the defendant below, appeals from a default



REL: 10/29/10

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.
ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011
2080992
Mark Ryder v.
James F. Mabry
Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court (CV-07-2614)
On Application for Rehearing
BRYAN, Judge.
The opinion of March 12, 2010, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor.
Mark Ryder, the defendant below, appeals from a default



REL: 10/29/10

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.
ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011
2080992
Mark Ryder v.
James F. Mabry
Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court (CV-07-2614)
On Application for Rehearing
BRYAN, Judge.
The opinion of March 12, 2010, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor.
Mark Ryder, the defendant below, appeals from a default



REL: 10/29/10

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.
ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011
2080992
Mark Ryder v.
James F. Mabry
Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court (CV-07-2614)
On Application for Rehearing
BRYAN, Judge.
The opinion of March 12, 2010, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor.
Mark Ryder, the defendant below, appeals from a default



REL: 10/29/10

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.
ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011
2080992
Mark Ryder v.
James F. Mabry
Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court (CV-07-2614)
On Application for Rehearing
BRYAN, Judge.
The opinion of March 12, 2010, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor.
Mark Ryder, the defendant below, appeals from a default



REL: 10/29/10

Southern Reporter
Southern Reporter.
ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
OCTOBER TERM, 2010-2011
2080992
Mark Ryder v.
James F. Mabry
Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court (CV-07-2614)
On Application for Rehearing
BRYAN, Judge.
The opinion of March 12, 2010, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor.
Mark Ryder, the defendant below, appeals from a default



2080992
judgment entered in favor of the plaintiff below, James F. Mabry. We affirm.
On July 27, 2007, Mabry sued Ryder, a resident of Virginia, alleging that Ryder had fraudulently induced him to buy units in People in Profit Systems, Inc. ("PIPS"), that those units constituted securities under Alabama law, and that they were part of a Ponzi scheme, which had resulted in Mabry's losing the $42,022.67 he had paid for the PIPS units. Mabry stated claims of conversion, fraud, and violation of the Alabama statutes governing the sale of securities.
Ryder, acting pro se, filed an answer denying liability and asserting, as an affirmative defense, that the trial court lacked in personam jurisdiction over him because he had not had sufficient contacts with the State of Alabama. Upon completion of discovery, the trial court set the action for trial on July 14, 2008.
On May 23, 2008, Ryder moved the trial court to dismiss the action on the ground that it lacked in personam jurisdiction over him. Specifically, Ryder's motion to dismiss asserted that Mabry had admitted in his responses to Ryder's discovery requests that Ryder's only contacts with the State

2



2080992
judgment entered in favor of the plaintiff below, James F. Mabry. We affirm.
On July 27, 2007, Mabry sued Ryder, a resident of Virginia, alleging that Ryder had fraudulently induced him to buy units in People in Profit Systems, Inc. ("PIPS"), that those units constituted securities under Alabama law, and that they were part of a Ponzi scheme, which had resulted in Mabry's losing the $42,022.67 he had paid for the PIPS units. Mabry stated claims of conversion, fraud, and violation of the Alabama statutes governing the sale of securities.
Ryder, acting pro se, filed an answer denying liability and asserting, as an affirmative defense, that the trial court lacked in personam jurisdiction over him because he had not had sufficient contacts with the State of Alabama. Upon completion of discovery, the trial court set the action for trial on July 14, 2008.
On May 23, 2008, Ryder moved the trial court to dismiss the action on the ground that it lacked in personam jurisdiction over him. Specifically, Ryder's motion to dismiss asserted that Mabry had admitted in his responses to Ryder's discovery requests that Ryder's only contacts with the State

2



2080992
judgment entered in favor of the plaintiff below, James F. Mabry. We affirm.
On July 27, 2007, Mabry sued Ryder, a resident of Virginia, alleging that Ryder had fraudulently induced him to buy units in People in Profit Systems, Inc. ("PIPS"), that those units constituted securities under Alabama law, and that they were part of a Ponzi scheme, which had resulted in Mabry's losing the $42,022.67 he had paid for the PIPS units. Mabry stated claims of conversion, fraud, and violation of the Alabama statutes governing the sale of securities.
Ryder, acting pro se, filed an answer denying liability and asserting, as an affirmative defense, that the trial court lacked in personam jurisdiction over him because he had not had sufficient contacts with the State of Alabama. Upon completion of discovery, the trial court set the action for trial on July 14, 2008.
On May 23, 2008, Ryder moved the trial court to dismiss the action on the ground that it lacked in personam jurisdiction over him. Specifically, Ryder's motion to dismiss asserted that Mabry had admitted in his responses to Ryder's discovery requests that Ryder's only contacts with the State

2



2080992
judgment entered in favor of the plaintiff below, James F. Mabry. We affirm.
On July 27, 2007, Mabry sued Ryder, a resident of Virginia, alleging that Ryder had fraudulently induced him to buy units in People in Profit Systems, Inc. ("PIPS"), that those units constituted securities under Alabama law, and that they were part of a Ponzi scheme, which had resulted in Mabry's losing the $42,022.67 he had paid for the PIPS units. Mabry stated claims of conversion, fraud, and violation of the Alabama statutes governing the sale of securities.
Ryder, acting pro se, filed an answer denying liability and asserting, as an affirmative defense, that the trial court lacked in personam jurisdiction over him because he had not had sufficient contacts with the State of Alabama. Upon completion of discovery, the trial court set the action for trial on July 14, 2008.
On May 23, 2008, Ryder moved the trial court to dismiss the action on the ground that it lacked in personam jurisdiction over him. Specifically, Ryder's motion to dismiss asserted that Mabry had admitted in his responses to Ryder's discovery requests that Ryder's only contacts with the State

2



2080992
judgment entered in favor of the plaintiff below, James F. Mabry. We affirm.
On July 27, 2007, Mabry sued Ryder, a resident of Virginia, alleging that Ryder had fraudulently induced him to buy units in People in Profit Systems, Inc. ("PIPS"), that those units constituted securities under Alabama law, and that they were part of a Ponzi scheme, which had resulted in Mabry's losing the $42,022.67 he had paid for the PIPS units. Mabry stated claims of conversion, fraud, and violation of the Alabama statutes governing the sale of securities.
Ryder, acting pro se, filed an answer denying liability and asserting, as an affirmative defense, that the trial court lacked in personam jurisdiction over him because he had not had sufficient contacts with the State of Alabama. Upon completion of discovery, the trial court set the action for trial on July 14, 2008.
On May 23, 2008, Ryder moved the trial court to dismiss the action on the ground that it lacked in personam jurisdiction over him. Specifically, Ryder's motion to dismiss asserted that Mabry had admitted in his responses to Ryder's discovery requests that Ryder's only contacts with the State

2



2080992

of Alabama were four telephone calls that Mabry had made to Ryder while Ryder was in Virginia.
Contemporaneously with the filing of his motion to dismiss, Ryder filed a motion for a summary judgment. As one of the grounds of his summary-judgment motion, Ryder asserted that the trial court lacked in personam jurisdiction, and he adopted his motion to dismiss as his statement of that ground.
In response to Ryder's motion to dismiss, Mabry asserted that the motion was untimely because, Mabry said, Rule 12(b), Ala. R. Civ. P., required that a motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of personal jurisdiction be made before Ryder filed his answer. In the alternative, Mabry asserted that, because Ryder had sold securities to an Alabama resident and those sales violated the Alabama Securities Act,

Download 2080992.pdf

Alabama Law