R. R. LAKE, PETITIONER,
v.
WILLIAMS AND NOBBS, INC., A CORPORATION, RESPONDENT
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 Florida Supreme Court held that a trial court retains jurisdiction to vacate a default judgment within 60 days of entry, even after the term of court has adjourned, overruling the Circuit Court's conclusion that the trial court lacked such jurisdiction. This decision clarifies an important exception to the general rule that courts cannot vacate judgments after term adjournment.
A court retains jurisdiction to vacate a default judgment entered for want of appearance or plea when the motion to vacate is made within 60 days of entry, regardless of whether the term of court has adjourned. The statutory provisions extend the term for purposes of entertaining such motions to a 60-day period from the date of default entry.
“It is a general rule applicable in most cases that a court may not vacate, by an order made after the adjournment of the term, a judgment rendered at such term which is not void, but this rule does not apply to judgments entered upon default for want of appearance or plea where the motion to vacate the default is made within the time prescribed by statute after the entry thereof.”
Establishes the key exception to the general rule prohibiting post-term vacation of judgments, specifically for default judgments when statutory requirements are met.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA default judgment was entered in the Civil Court of Record in Duval County. After the term of court adjourned, but within 60 days of the judgment's e…
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 Term Of Court cases and more on FLexlaw
In this case default and final judgments were entered in the Civil Court of Record in Duval County during a term of that Court. After the term of court adjourned, and within sixty days, the defendant moved to vacate the default and judgment consequent thereon. * * * The motion was granted. A new trial was had and resulted in a judgment in favor of defendant.
Plaintiff took writ of error from the Circuit Court. The Circuit Court held that the Civil Court of Record was without jurisdiction to vacate the default and final judgment consequent thereon, because the term of court at which the *79judgment was entered had expired before the order vacating the same was made. The case is before us on certiorari to the judgment of the Circuit Court.
It is a general rule applicable in most cases that a court may not vacate, by an order made after the adjournment of the term, a judgment rendered at such term which is not void, but this rule does not apply to judgments entered upon default for want of appearance or plea where the motion to vacate the default is made within the time prescribed by statute after the entry thereof. See Eli Witt Cigar & Tobacco Co. v. Sommers, 99 Fla. 592, 127 Sou. 333.
The provisions of Section 2621 R. G. S., 4287 C. G. L., in effect are to extend the term at which a default is entered for want of appearance or plea, for the purpose of entertaining motion to vacate default to a period of sixty days from the date of entry of default, unless a subsequent term of the Court shall sooner intervene. .
For this reason, the judgment of the Circuit Court must be quashed.
It is so ordered.
Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Perrin v. Enos, 56 So.2d 920 (Fla. 1951)…e the motion could be presented and ruled upon during the ensuing term of court. The motion to set aside the final judgment was lawfully presented. See Eli Witt Cigar & Tobacco Co. v. Somers, 99 Fla. 592, 127 So. 333; Lake v. Williams & Nobbs, Inc., 109 Fla. 78, 147 So. 221. The order vacating the final judgment was a discretionary ruling under Alabama Hotel Co. v. J.L. Mott Iron Works, supra, and other adjudications of this Court. When the challenged order was entered the trial Court had before him sworn…
Authorities Cited
- Eli Witt Cigar & Tobacco Co. v. Somers, 99 Fla. 592 (Fla. 1930)