MICHAEL F. CARR, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS TRUSTEE OF 5914 NORTH SURF ROAD TRUST, APPELLANT,
v.
MARK F. BUTLER AND DONALD J. KISSLAN, 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.
A clerk's default is inappropriate when a party has filed previous documents, even if not timely responsive to a specific pleading.
Appellant failed to timely file a pleading responsive to a cross-claim, leading to a clerk's default and subsequent default judgment. Appellant had pr…
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 Clerk'S Default cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This case involves a default entered by the clerk and a default judgment subsequently rendered by the court. While it may be true that appellant did not timely file a pleading responsive to the cross-claim upon which default was entered, he had previously filed several documents in the case. Under such circumstances Florida law is reasonably clear that a clerk’s default under rule 1.500(a), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, is inappropriate since it cannot be said that the defaulted party “has failed to file or serve any paper in the action_” See, e.g., Cardet v. Resolution Trust Corp., 563 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Monte Campbell Crane Co. v. Hancock, 510 So. 2d 1104 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Reicheinbach v. Southeast Bank N.A., 462 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Turner v. Allen, 389 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).
Even if this were not so appellant would be entitled to relief, having acted with due diligence upon learning of the default, having demonstrated excusable neglect, and having alleged a meritorious defense. See Somero v. Hendry General Hosp., 467 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied sub nom., Hay slip v. Somero, 476 So. 2d 674 (Fla.1985).
We therefore reverse and remand for further appropriate proceedings. The default and default judgment consequent thereon are vacated.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
DOWNEY, HERSEY and DELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Clive Stuart-Findlay v. Bank OF Am., 183 So. 3d 468 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)…the bank is mistaken. As stated above, once a defendant files a paper in the action, the clerk no longer may enter a default against the defendant, regardless of whether the defendant has filed a timely response to the complaint. Cf. Carr v. Butler, 590 So. 2d 508, 509 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (“While it may be true that appellant did not timely file a pleading responsive to the cross-claim upon which default was entered, he had previously filed several documents in the case. Under such circumstances Florida law i…
Authorities Cited
- Glenna Somero and Robert Somero v. Hendry Gen. Hosp., 467 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
- Reicheinbach v. Se. Bank, N.A., 462 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
- Turner v. Allen, 389 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- Cardet v. Resolution Tr. Corp., 563 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Monte Campbell Crane Co., Inc. v. Hancock, 510 So. 2d 1104 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)