JAMES C. CARDER, ETC., ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
PELICAN COVE WEST HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., ETC., ET AL., 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 a motion to dismiss filed before a default is entered precludes the entry of default.
Appellants' motion to dismiss was filed, but a default judgment was later entered against them. The trial court described the case as a 'procedural mo…
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.
COBB, Judge.
This is a confused and confusing case, described by the trial court as a “procedural morass,” but the issue before us boils down to the validity of a default entered against the appellants James C. and Rosemary Carder and Belmont Homes, Inc. The motion for that default was filed on June 1, 1989, but the default itself was not entered until February 25, 1991. In the interim, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss, which was denied on July 21,1989.
The filing of the motion to dismiss precluded any subsequent entry of default in respect to any complaint pending at that time. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.500(c). See Board of Regents, University of Florida v. Hardin, 393 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Chester, Blackburn & Roder, Inc. v. Marchese, 383 So. 2d 734 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).
Resurrection of this case is far from consistent with the tenets of judicial economy. As the trial court has noted, it is a procedural nightmare which seems to have taken on a life of its own. As was stated by the court in Board of Regents:
[W]e do not in any way condone the dilatory behavior of Appellants’ counsel in this proceeding, nevertheless, the meaning of the applicable sentence in Rule 1.500(c) is plain, and the literal interpretation given it in the cases cited above is unavoidable. No exceptions exist to cover the unfortunate situation presented in this case.
Although this appeal presents another “unfortunate situation,” we must reverse the default judgment entered below.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
GOSHORN, C.J., concurs.
GRIFFIN, J., concurs in result only.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pro-Art Dental LAB, Inc. v. V-Strategic Grp., LLC, 986 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 2008)…ng, Inc., 718 So. 2d 1265, 1266 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); Chester, Blackburn & Roder, Inc. v. Marchese, 383 So. 2d 734, 735 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); TLC Trust v. Sender, 757 So. 2d 570, 571 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Carder v. Pelican Cove W. Homeowners Ass’n, Inc., 595 So. 2d 174, 174-75 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); see also Henry P. Trawick, Trawick’s Florida Practice and Procedure § 25.2 (2007-OS ed.) (“Until the default is entered, a party can serve a proper motion or pleading and avoid a default. The right to plead before entry…
-
Clark v. Perlman, 599 So. 2d 710 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…v. Tanner, 561 So. 2d 1336, 1338 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). Accord Gulf Maintenance v. Barnett Bank, 543 So. 2d at 816; Board of Regents, Univ. of Florida v. Hardin, 393 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Carder v. Pelican Cove West Homeowners Assoc., Inc., 595 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); Graves v. Giordano, 590 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Gould v. Ruzakowski, 322 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). In the instant case, defendant/appellant filed a pro se answer and motion to dismiss directed to plaintiff/appelle…
-
Drake v. The Pub. Health Tr. OF Dade Cnty., 832 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)…e Complaint prior to the hearing on the Plaintiffs Motion for Default, both the Default against the appellant and the Default Final Judgment were improvidently granted. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.500(c); Carder v. Pelican Cove West Homeowners Ass’n Inc., 595 So. 2d 174, 175 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)(“[t]he filing of the motion to dismiss precluded any subsequent entry of default in respect to any complaint pending at that time.”) (citations omitted); see also Lenhal Realty Inc. v. Transamerica Commercial Finance Corp.,…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Chester v. Marchese, 383 So. 2d 734 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Bd. OF Regents v. Schuyler Hardin & Transamerica Ins. Co., 393 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)