Matthias v. Bingley, 906 F.2d at 1054; and Bennett v. City of Slidell, 735 F.2d at 862. 166 . Richardson v. Oldham, 12 F.3d 1373, 1381-82 (5th Cir.1994). 167 . See Board of Commissioners, Bryan County, Oklahoma v. Brown,-U.S. at---, 117 S.Ct. at 1388-89; Pembaur v. City of Cincinnati, 475 U.S. at 483-84, 106 S.Ct. at 1299-1300 (plurality); see also City of St. Louis v. Praprotnik, 485 U.S. at 121-22, 108 S.Ct. at 923; Richardson v. Oldham, 12 F.3d at 1381-82; Gonzalez v. Ysleta ISD, 996 F.2d 745, 752-60 (5th Cir.1993); Colle v. Brazos County, Texas, 981 F.2d at 244-45, Rhyne v. Henderson County, 973 F.2d at 392; and Benavides v. ■County of Wilson, 955 F.2d at 972-73. 168 . See Collins v. City of Harker Heights, 916 F.2d 284, 286 (5th nter, Inc., 556 F.2d 308, 309 (5th Cir.1977), (<HOLDING>); and In re Zorrilla, 115 B.R. 894, 897
holding that the defense of insufficient process was waived because it was not raised by the defendant in its answer but later in its response to the plaintiffs request for default judgment holding on summary judgment that an attorney who failed to timely file an answer leading to a default judgment was on notice that a malpractice claim might be filed against him holding that a default judgment could not be rendered after defendants counsel telephoned plaintiffs attorney to request additional time within which to answer holding that default judgment could not be rendered after the defendant had served plaintiff with a copy of a motion to dismiss that had not then been filed holding that a default judgment could not be rendered without satisfying the procedural requirements of rule 55b2 fedrcivp after the defendant had made an appearance in the lawsuit by filing an answer in state court in a case that had been removed to federal court