ERIE WINDS, N.V. AND CANDY STORE CORPORATION, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANTS,
v.
CRAB POT OCEANSIDE, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, D/B/A TOBAGO RESTAURANT, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 1984-05-09
No. 83-2697
DOWNEY, DELL and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.
449 So. 2d 426 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1984) Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases

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.

Holding

The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in striking the appellants' pleadings and entering defaults as sanctions for procedural violations.

Facts & Procedural History

Appellants sought review of trial court orders striking their pleadings and entering defaults as sanctions for numerous procedural violations. The rec…

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.

Topics
Reasonableness Test For Discretion Entry Of Default Judgment Sanctions For Procedural Violations Procedural Violations

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Reasonableness Test For Discretion cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellants seek review of several orders of the trial court striking appellants’ pleadings and entering defaults as sanctions for a multitude of procedural violations on the part of appellants.

Without detailing all of the facts, suffice to say that the record supports the trial judge’s finding of a long, consistent failure of appellants to timely plead, submit to discovery, or attend hearings sufficient to justify the harsh action taken. Such action is discretionary and precludes appellate interference absent an abuse thereof. As the supreme court recently stated in Mercer v. Raine, 443 So. 2d 944 (Fla.1983):

Thus, to justify reversal, it would have to be shown on appeal that the trial court clearly erred in its interpretation of the facts and the use of its judgment and not merely that the court, or another fact-finder, might have made a different factual determination. 443 So. 2d at 946.

Once again the supreme court has applied the oft described test set forth in Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980), to determine the parameters of the trial court’s discretion in granting sanctions:

In reviewing a true discretionary act, the appellate court must fully recognize the superior vantage point of the trial judge and should apply the “reasonableness” test to determine whether the trial judge abused his discretion. If reasonable men could differ as to the propriety of the action taken by the trial court, then the action is not unreasonable and there can be no finding of an abuse of discretion. The discretionary ruling of the trial judge should be disturbed only when his decision fails to satisfy this test of reasonableness. 443 So. 2d at 946.

Accordingly, we affirm the orders appealed from.

AFFIRMED.

DOWNEY, DELL and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • F. Food Co., Inc. v. Hart Props., Inc., 515 So. 2d 279 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
    …d 393, 394 (Fla. 3d DCA), cause dismissed, 453 So. 2d 44 (Fla.1984). Accordingly, no abuse of the trial court’s discretion having been demonstrated, see Mercer v. Raine, 443 [*280] So. 2d 944 (Fla.1983); Erie Winds, N.V. v. Crab Pot Oceanside, Inc., 449 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Henry A. Knott Co. v. Redington Towers, Inc., 428 So. 2d 687 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Perez, 445 So. 2d at 394, the order of dismissal under review is affirmed. Affirmed.…
  • FAR OUT Music, Inc. v. Jordan, 502 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
    …national Union of Operating Engineers, 349 So. 2d 622, 625-26 (Fla.1976); Royal Netherlands S.S. v. Quinto De Garcia, 489 So. 2d 128, 130 (Fla. 3d DCA), pet. for review denied, 496 So. 2d 143 (Fla.1986); Erie Winds, N.V. v. Crab Pot Oceanside, Inc., 449 So. 2d 426, 427 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); American Fidelity Fire Ins. Co. v. Woody’s Elec. Serv., 407 So. 2d 947, 948 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). The final judgment under review, therefore, is, in all respects, Affirmed.…
  • Solitron Devices, Inc. v. Veeco Instruments, Inc., 458 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
    …PER CURIAM. We deny the petition for certiorari on the authority of Mercer v. Raine, 443 So. 2d 944 (Fla.1983) and Erie Winds, N.V. v. Crab Pot Oceanside, Inc., 449 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). Denied. LETTS, GLICKSTEIN and DELL, JJ., concur.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw