Even if service was insufficient, Regions—the party to which the three writs were directed—waived that insufficiency when it answered them. See Answers [91, 113-2, 136]; Y-D Lumber Co. v. Humphreys Cnty., 2 So. 3d 793, 796 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009) (citing Roy v. Heard, 38 Miss. 544, 545 (1860)). And while the garnishment statutes provide that the debtor "may contest, in writing, the answer of the garnishee," they do not give the debtor the right to resuscitate a waived defense of insufficiency of process.
Plaintiff claims that Tower breached its fiduciary duty to Plaintiff when it allegedly failed to release the entire garnishment amount to the State of Mississippi. Under Mississippi law, garnishment is a proceeding between a judgment creditor, or garnishor, and a garnishee, which is often the judgment debtor's employer. Y-D Lumber Co., Inc. v. Humphreys Co., 2 So.3d 793, 795 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009) (citing Folse v. Stennett-Yancy, 757 So.2d 989, 991-92 (Miss. 2000)).
d . at 956 (emphasis added); cf.Y-D Lumber Co. v. Humphreys County , 2 So. 3d 793, 797 (¶13) (Miss. Ct. App. 2009) (holding "there can be no default judgment against [the State] for failing to answer a writ of garnishment").
¶ 5. When addressing questions of law, this Court uses a de novo standard of review. Y–D Lumber Co., Inc. v. Humphreys Cnty., 2 So.3d 793, 796 (¶ 8) (Miss.Ct.App.2009). DISCUSSION