RONEY PLAZA ASSOCIATES, LTD., APPELLANT,
v.
ANTHONY HENRY AND LYNETTE HENRY, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion To Vacate Default Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Roney Plaza Associates, Ltd. (“Roney”), appeals from the denial of its motion to vacate judgment and default. The record reflects that Roney demonstrated a meritorious defense to the action, established excusable neglect for its failure to respond to the complaint and notice of trial, and acted with due diligence in moving to set aside the default judgment. Thus it was an abuse of discretion for the trial court to refuse to set aside the default, and we reverse the order denying Roney’s motion to vacate judgment and default. See North Shore Hosp., Inc. v. Barber, 143 So. 2d 849 (Fla.1962); Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Traveler, 699 So. 2d 847 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Electric Engineering Co., Inc. v. General Elec. Can., Inc., 610 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992).
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gannon v. Cuckler, 281 So. 3d 587 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019)…Crim. Justice, 588 So. 2d 236, 237 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991))). So too when the State files an amended information in a criminal case. See, e.g., Bryant v. State, 757 So. 2d 617, 618 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), receded from on other grounds by State v. Demars, 848 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); State v. Calle, 560 So. 2d 355, 356 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). When a party files an amended brief in this court, we regard the amended filing as a new and separate document and disregard the old one. As ordinarily understood, then…
-
State v. Pfeiffer, 872 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)…fendant is not, however, automatically entitled to discharge simply because 175 days have passed and he has not been tried. Rather, upon expiration of the 175 days, the defendant must file a notice of expiration of speedy trial. See State v. Demars, 848 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)(en banc); State v. Gibson, 783 So. 2d 1155, 1158 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001); State v. Robinson, 744 So. 2d 1151, 1153 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). It is the filing of this notice of expiration of speedy trial that triggers the rule’s protection…
-
Quallo v. State, 856 So. 2d 1100 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…state was not entitled to the benefit of the rule 3.191 recapture period and the trial court should have granted the motion for discharge. Accordingly, if the facts are as alleged by petitioner, he is entitled to discharge. But cf. State v. Demars, 848 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (en banc) (where, in a case apparently factually indistinguishable from Genden, the court held that a notice of expiration of speedy trial was necessary, implying that the state is entitled to the benefit of the rule 3.191(p) rec…
Previewing 3 of 8 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)
- Elec. Eng'g Co., Inc. v. Gen. Elec. Canada, Inc., 610 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
- Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Traveler, 699 So. 2d 847 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)