HOLIDAY GULF BUILDERS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
TAHITIAN GARDENS CONDOMINIUM, INC., A NONPROFIT FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Holiday Gulf Builders appeals a default judgment entered against it in a condominium assessment dispute. The court affirmed the denial of Holiday's motion to set aside the default but reversed and remanded the final judgment, holding that Holiday was entitled to a jury trial on damages despite the default, because the plaintiff demanded a jury trial and the damages were not liquidated.
A defendant in default is entitled to a jury trial on damages when the plaintiff has demanded a jury trial and the defendant has not consented to withdrawal of that demand. The assessments and attorney's fees in this case were unliquidated damages because they depended on variables not set forth in the pleaded agreement, including future maintenance expenditures and special assessments.
[1] A trial court's denial of a motion to set aside a default will not be reversed absent a gross abuse of discretion.
[2] A defendant is entitled to a jury trial on the issue of damages even after a default has been entered, if the plaintiff previously demanded a jury trial and the demand wa…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“It is well settled that where a plaintiff has made a demand for jury trial, the defendant is entitled to a jury trial on the issue of damages even though a default has been previously entered against the defendant for failure to answer or otherwise plead.”
Establishes the core legal principle that default does not eliminate a defendant's right to a jury trial when demanded by the plaintiff.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTahitian Gardens filed suit against Holiday Gulf Builders, a successor developer, seeking assessments for thirty-six unbuilt units in a Pasco County c…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Liquidated Vs. Unliquidated Damages cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHEB, Judge.
Holiday Gulf Builders, Inc., appeals the trial court’s order denying its motion to set aside default and the final judgment entered in favor of Tahitian Gardens Condominium, Inc. We affirm the order refusing to set aside the default but reverse the final judgment awarding damages and attorney’s fees to Tahitian Gardens.
Tahitian Gardens filed suit alleging that assessments were due from Holiday, a successor developer, for thirty-six unbuilt units in a Pasco County condominium complex. The trial court entered a default against Holiday after it failed to answer the complaint within the requisite time period.
Subsequently, without notice to the defendant, the trial court entered final judgment against Holiday. Over two weeks later, Holiday filed a motion to set aside default and final judgment pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.500(d). After receiving Holiday’s affidavits and hearing arguments by counsel, the trial court found that Holiday failed to show excusable neglect and also failed to establish a meritorious defense. The court denied Holiday’s motion, and this appeal ensued.
We have examined the record and Holiday’s argument alleging error in the trial court’s denial of its motion to set aside default. We find no gross abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court. Therefore, we are not authorized to reverse on this point. Sterling Drug, Inc. v. Wright, 342 So. 2d 503 (Fla.1977).
However, we do find merit in Holiday’s contention that the trial court erred in entering a final judgment awarding damages and attorney’s fees to Tahitian Gardens without submitting the issue of damages to a jury. Tahitian Gardens requested a jury trial in two of the three counts of the complaint. These two counts included the relief awarded in the final judgment.
In Ansel v. Kizer, 428 So. 2d 671 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982), this court stated: It is well settled that where a plaintiff has made a demand for jury trial, the defendant is entitled to a jury trial on the issue of damages even though a default has been previously entered against the defendant for failure to answer or otherwise plead.
428 So. 2d at 672. See also Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.430. Here, Holiday never consented to any withdrawal of the demand for a jury trial. Tahitian Gardens, nevertheless, contends that any error in withdrawing the demand for a jury trial is harmless, because the damages in this case are liquidated. We disagree. The complaint incorporated the declaration of condominium, which formed the basis of the agreement between the parties. The declaration established the percentage of the total assessments that each unit would be required to pay. These percentages varied according to the individual units. The declaration also established a procedure for determining and collecting the assessments. Consequently, the assessments would vary depending upon the expenditures required to maintain the common elements as well as any additional special assessments. The amount of damages that Holiday owed Tahitian Gardens for assessments on the thirty-six unbuilt units would depend upon variables not set forth in the pleaded agreement. See Robinson v. Peterson, 375 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). Holiday is therefore entitled to a jury trial on the issue of damages.
Likewise, Holiday is entitled to a jury trial on the issue of attorney’s fees. In addition to establishing a procedure for assessments, the declaration of condominium provided for the payment of reasonable attorney’s fees when Tahitian Gardens incurs legal expenses in the collection of delinquent assessments. In Newcombe v. South Florida Business Negotiators, 340 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976), we stated that “[i]n a jury trial a claim for attorney’s fees predicated upon a provision in the contract between the parties becomes an element of damages and must be determined by the jury.” 340 So. 2d at 1194. Tahitian Gardens’ request for “reasonable” attorney’s fees is a request for unliquidat-ed damages, and consequently Holiday is entitled to a jury trial on that issue as well. Bowman v. Kingsland Development, Inc., 432 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).
Accordingly, we affirm the order denying Holiday’s motion to set aside default, but we vacate the final judgment and remand for a jury trial on the issue of damages including attorney’s fees.
BOARDMAN, A.C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Szucs v. Qualico Dev., Inc., 893 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)…CA 1983). We disagree with Szucs’ argument that he is entitled to a trial by jury. However, because the plaintiffs did not demand a jury trial, the matter - may be tried by the court. Cf. Holiday Gulf Builders, Inc. v. Tahitian Gardens Condo., Inc., 443 So. 2d 143, 145 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Air Unlimited Inc., 428 So. 2d at 294-95; E. Koex Co., Ltd. v. Bonanza Import & Export, Inc., 360 So. 2d 153,155 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). Accordingly we affirm the order denying the motion to vacate clerk’s default and the summa…
-
Hornblower v. Toynetta C. Cobb, 932 So. 2d 402 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…l by jury may not be withdrawn without the consent of the parties.” Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.430(d). The rule applies even where, as here, the defendant has defaulted on the liability issue. See Holiday Gulf Builders, Inc. v. Tahitian Gardens Condo., Inc., 443 So. 2d 143, 145 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). The purpose of [rule 1.430(d) ] is to safeguard the existence of the right of jury trial to non-demanding par-ties where a demand has been made by one of the parties. Without the provision one of the parties might demand a…
-
Paramo v. Floyd, 154 So. 3d 477 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)…se the exact sum. Medcom U.S.A., Inc. v. Ryder Homes & Groves Co., 847 So. 2d 594, 596 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). We consider claims for reasonable attorney’s fees, too, as unliquidated damages. Holiday Gulf Builders, Inc. v. Tahitian Gardens Condo., Inc., 443 So. 2d 143, 145 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). The trial court awarded the Floyds damages of $237,000. This amount consisted of a $15,000 deposit, $30,000 for demolition work, and $34,000 for unaccounted-for building materials. Under the civil theft statute, section 772…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Flagship Nat'l Bank OF Miami v. Gray Distrib. Sys., Inc., 432 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Sterling Drug, Inc. v. Wright, 342 So. 2d 503 (Fla. 1977)
- Newcombe v. S. Fla. Bus. Negotiators, Inc., 340 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)
- Anne Ansel and Alvin Robins v. Kizer, 428 So. 2d 671 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)
- Robinson v. Fernanda Peterson, 375 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)