A.H. ARNOLD, INDIVIDUALLY, AND RESORT MARKETS LIMITED, APPELLANTS,
v.
THOMAS C. MASSEBEAU, JR., INDIVIDUALLY, MASS ENTERPRISES, INC., SAND AND SURF II, AND TRAVELERS TIMESHARE, LTD., 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.
Arnold and Resort Markets Limited appealed the trial court's denial of their motion to set aside a default judgment. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court has inherent discretionary power to reconsider orders denying motions to set aside defaults prior to final judgment, and that the appellants' supporting materials established both excusable neglect and a meritorious defense.
The trial court has inherent discretionary power to reconsider any order entered prior to final judgment, including orders denying motions to set aside defaults. The appellants' motion for rehearing, supporting affidavits, and proposed answer established both excusable neglect and a meritorious defense, warranting reconsideration.
[1] A motion to set aside a default judgment should be granted when the moving party demonstrates excusable neglect and a meritorious defense.
[2] A trial court possesses inherent discretionary power to reconsider any order entered prior to the rendition of a final judgment.
Previewing 2 of 3 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 established that a trial court has the inherent discretionary power to reconsider any order entered prior to rendition of the final judgment in the cause”
Establishes the core holding that trial courts retain inherent authority to reconsider nonfinal orders, even though such orders are not subject to petitions for rehearing as a matter of right.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellants Arnold and Resort Markets Limited had a default judgment entered against them. They filed a motion to set aside the default, which the tria…
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 Motion To Set Aside Default cases and more on FLexlaw
COWART, Judge.
The order denying appellants’ motion to set aside a default is reversed because appellants’ motion for rehearing, the supporting affidavits, and the proposed answer and affirmative defenses established excusable neglect and a meritorious defense. See North Shore Hospital, Inc. v. Barber, 143 So. 2d 849 (Fla.1962); Associated Medical Institutions, Inc. v. Imperatori, 338 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Rubin v. Baker, 276 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973).
The trial court was correct in determining that under the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure a legally insufficient motion cannot be corrected as a matter of right by a motion for reconsideration or rehearing, see Dalton v. Dalton, 412 So. 2d 928 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); however, the trial court apparently determined that it was without authority to reconsider the denial of the original motion to vacate. While an order denying a motion to set aside a default judgment is a nonfinal order and, thus, petitions for rehearing are not authorized, see Smith v. Weede, 433 So. 2d 992 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), it is well established that a trial court has the inherent discretionary power to reconsider any order entered prior to rendition of the final judgment in the cause. See North Shore Hospital, Inc. v. Barber, 143 So. 2d 849 (Fla.1962); Commercial Garden Mall v. Success Academy, Inc., 453 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). Cf. Associated Medical Institutions, Inc. v. Imperatori, 338 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Rubin v. Baker, 276 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973).
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for reconsideration by the trial court consistent with the above authority.
DAUKSCH and COBB, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hunter v. Dennies Contracting Co., Inc., 693 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…opriate, to alter or retract them. However, the court is not required to exercise that authority, and its decisions whether to do so generally are not renewable. Bettez v. City of Miami, 510 So. 2d 1242, 1243 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Arnold v. Massebeau, 493 So. 2d 91, 92 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). The rule differs with respect to a temporary injunction issued without prior notice, in which case the trial court must hear the enjoined party’s motion to dissolve. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.610(d). Moreover, at the hearing on the mo…
-
Gibson Tr., Inc. v. Allen, 883 So. 2d 379 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)…rehearing was more than a general denial, which would also be sufficient to warrant reversal. See City of Hollywood v. Cordasco, 575 So. 2d 301, 302 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)(reversing based on failure to grant motion for rehearing); Arnold v. Massebeau, 493 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)(same). For the reasons stated above, we reverse and remand with directions to vacate the default judgment and allow further proceedings on the merits. REVERSED and REMANDED. WARNER, KLEIN and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.…
-
City OF Hollywood v. Cordasco, 575 So. 2d 301 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…cannot be corrected as a matter of right by a motion for reconsideration or hearing, a trial court does have the inherent discretionary power to reconsider any order entered prior to the rendition of final judgment in the cause. Arnold v. Massebeau, 493 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). In the instant case, the trial court correctly exercised its discretionary power and ruled on the motion for rehearing. However, once the trial court correctly exercised its discretion, it erred in denying Hollywood’s motion fo…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- N. Shore Hosp., Inc. v. Barber, 143 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 1962)
- Associated Med. Insts., Inc. v. Imperatori, 338 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)
- Smith v. Weede, 433 So. 2d 992 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)
- Travelers Indem. Co. OF Am. v. Se. Commc'ns, Inc., 453 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Commercial Garden Mall v. The Success Acad., Inc., 453 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
- Ellis S. Rubin v. Blanche Toni Baker, 276 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)
- Dalton v. Olin Dalton, 412 So. 2d 928 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)