ISABELLA NOEL, APPELLANT,
v.
BERNARD SCHONINGER AND HOWARD SCHONINGER AS PARTNERS D/B/A SCHONINGER ENTERPRISES, F/K/A CASTO DEVELOPERS, APPELLEES
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.
The court held that striking pleadings and entering a default judgment is too severe a sanction when non-attendance is due to a spouse's grave illness and counsel's failure to notify.
The defendant's husband was gravely ill, and her counsel failed to notify her of a scheduled deposition. This led to her non-attendance at the deposit…
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 Striking Pleadings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendant Isabella Noel appeals from a final default judgment entered in favor of the plaintiffs, Bernard and Howard Schoninger, partners in Schoninger Enterprises. We reverse.
The record reflects and it is undisputed that the medical condition of Noel’s husband was grave. It further appears without dispute that, among other deficiencies, counsel for Noel failed to notify her of at least one of her scheduled depositions. Though we appreciate the court’s frustration, the sanction of striking the pleadings and entering a default is too severe where there is no dispute that the reasons for Noel’s nonattendance were her husband’s illness and her counsel’s failure to notify her. See Beasley v. Girten, 61 So. 2d 179 (Fla.1952); Livingston v. State, Department of Corrections, 481 So. 2d 2 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Lazare v. Weiss, 437 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Summit Chase Condominium Association v. Protean Investors, Inc., 421 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Zayres Department Stores v. Fingerhut, 383 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).
We reverse and remand to the trial court with instructions to reinstate Noel’s counterclaim and her answer. On remand, plaintiff may apply for, and the trial court may impose, less severe sanctions for the discovery abuses. Zayres Department Stores, 383 So. 2d at 266.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Whitney v. Fla. Dep't of Health, 992 So. 2d 412 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…PER CURIAM. There is no basis in the evidence or law to support the determinations below that the appellant, a chiropractor, violated [*413] § 460.413(l)(d), Fla. Stat.1 See Rosenberg v. Dep’t of Prof'l Reg., Bd. of Chiropractic Exam’rs, 488 So. 2d 153 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Sherman v. Dep’t of Prof'l Reg., 452 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (Anstead, C.J., concurring specially); see also Pub. Health Trust of Dade Co. v. Lopez, 531 So. 2d 946 (Fla.1988); Hotel & Rest. Comm’n v. Sunny Seas No. One, I…
Authorities Cited
- Beasley v. Girten, 61 So.2d 179 (Fla. 1952)
- Summit Chase Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. Protean Invs., Inc., 421 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Jacobsen v. Monroe Cnty., 383 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Livingston v. State, 481 So. 2d 2 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Calafell v. Kinstler, 437 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Cavanaugh v. Etta Reuben, 437 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)