DIEGO PARAMO AND D.M.P. BUILDERS AND ASSOCIATES, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
VINCENT FLOYD AND VIANNE FLOYD, 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.
Paramo appeals a default judgment for civil theft entered against them by the Floyds. The court reversed the damages award, holding that the trial court erroneously awarded unliquidated damages without an evidentiary hearing, though it affirmed the default judgment on other issues.
A default admits all well-pleaded allegations in a complaint, including entitlement to liquidated damages, but does not automatically entitle a plaintiff to unliquidated damages. Unliquidated damages require an evidentiary hearing to ascertain the facts necessary to calculate the exact amount. The trial court erred in awarding the Floyds damages without such a hearing.
[1] A default admits all well-pleaded allegations of a complaint, including a plaintiff's entitlement to liquidated damages.
[2] A default does not automatically entitle a plaintiff to unliquidated damages.
Previewing 2 of 6 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“A default admits all well-pleaded allegations of a complaint, including a plaintiffs entitlement to liquidated damages; but a default does not automatically entitle a plaintiff to unliquidated damages.”
Establishes the foundational rule that default judgments have limitations regarding unliquidated damages claims.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Floyds sued Paramo for civil theft in connection with a home expansion and remodel project. Paramo defaulted in the litigation. The trial court aw…
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 Unliquidated Damages cases and more on FLexlaw
Diego Paramo and D.M.P. Builders and Associates, Inc. (collectively, “Paramo”), appeal the final default judgment entered against them and in favor of Vincent and Vianne Floyd. The Floyds sued Paramo for civil theft in connection -with a project to expand and remodel their home. The trial court erroneously awarded the Floyds unliquidated damages without an eviden-tiary hearing. Accordingly, we reverse the default judgment as to damages and remand for an evidentiary hearing. We affirm as to all other issues without further comment.
A default admits all well-pleaded allegations of a complaint, including a plaintiffs entitlement to liquidated damages; but a default does not automatically entitle a plaintiff to unliquidated damages. Szucs v. Qualico Dev., Inc., 893 So.2d 708, 712 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (quoting Bowman v. Kingsland Dev., Inc., 432 So.2d 660, 662-63 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)). “Damages are liquidated when the proper amount to be awarded can be determined with exact-, ness from the cause of action as pleaded, i.e., from a pleaded agreement between the parties, by an arithmetical calculation or by application of definite rules of law.” Bowman, 432 So.2d at 662. Damages are unliquidated, however, if testimony is required to ascertain facts upon which to base the exact sum. Medcom U.S.A., Inc. v. Ryder Homes & Groves Co., 847 So.2d 594, 596 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). We consider claims for reasonable attorney’s fees, too, as unliquidated damages. Holiday Gulf Builders, Inc. v. Tahitian Gardens Condo., Inc., 443 So.2d 143, 145 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).
The trial court awarded the Floyds damages of $237,000. This amount consisted of a $15,000 deposit, $30,000 for demolition work, and $34,000 for unaccounted-for building materials. Under the civil theft statute, section 772.11, Florida Statutes (2011-12), the trial court tripled the claimed actual damages for a total of $237,000.
Although the Floyds claimed what they perceived to be a liquidated damage amount, their saying so does not make it so. See Rich v. Spivey, 922 So.2d 326, 327 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); United States Fire Ins. Co. v. C & C Beauty Sales, Inc., 674 So.2d 169, 172 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996) (“The fact that [plaintiff] alleged in its complaint that the value of the stolen inventory was a certain amount does not make the claim liquidated”). “If the court determines that defendant is in default, the factual allegations of the complaint, except those relating to the amount of damages, will be taken as true.... ” Rich, 922 So.2d at 328 (quoting Charles A. Wright, Arthur R. Miller, & Mary Kane, Federal Practice & Procedure Civil § 2688, at 58-59).
For example, the Floyds included in their damage calculation amounts paid for completed work. The Floyds must concede that Paramo finished the demolition work. Yet, they included $30,000 for demolition as a damage item. The $34,000 item for missing building materials appears to be based only on the Floyds’ estimation. This is not an exact calculation as required for liquidated damages. “Damages are not liquidated if the ascertainment of their exact sum requires the taking of testimony to ascertain facts upon which to base a value judgment.” Szucs, 893 So.2d. at 712 (quoting Bowman, 432 So.2d at 662-63). .
An evidentiary hearing is necessary to determine the amount of damages owed to the Floyds. We must reverse the damages award and remand to the trial court for further proceedings.
*479Affirmed in part, reversed- in part, and remanded.
KHOUZAM and SLEET, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Robert Maggiano, D.O., P.A. v. Whiskey Creek Prof'l Ctr., LLC, 160 So. 3d 535 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)…ld have prevented the entry of a summary judgment. See, e.g., Volusia Cnty. v. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So. 2d 126 (Fla.2000). A default judgment can be entered on liquidated damages without further proof of damages. See Paramo v. Floyd, 154 So. 3d 477, 478 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015). But a hearing is required on claims for unliquidated damages even where a party has been defaulted. Medcom USA, Inc. v. Ryder Homes & Groves Co., 847 So. 2d 594, 596 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Whether the damages are liquidated by…
-
Ciotti v. Nanci Hubsch, 302 So. 3d 497 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020)…tion of definite rules of law.” Id. at 662. Damages are not liquidated, however, “if the ascertainment of their exact sum requires the taking of testimony to ascertain facts upon which to base a value judgment.” Id. at 663; see also Paramo v. Floyd, 154 So. 3d 477, 478 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (holding that “[a]n evidentiary hearing is necessary to determine the amount of [unliquidated] damages”); Minkoff v. Caterpillar Fin. Servs. Corp., 103 So. 3d 1049, 1051 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (“Where the damages are unliquidate…
-
Ralston E. Macdonnell and Charlene ANN Latimer-Macdonnell v. US Bank Nat'l Assoc. as Legal Title Tr. for Truman 2013 Sc4 Title Tr., 293 So. 3d 585 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020)…n the proper amount to be awarded can be determined with exactness from the cause of action as pleaded, i.e., from a pleaded agreement between the parties, by an arithmetical calculation or by application of definite rules of law." Paramo v. Floyd, 154 So. 3d 477, 478 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (quoting Bowman v. Kingsland Dev., Inc., 432 So. 2d 660, 662 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)). But if testimony is necessary to determine facts upon which to base the exact amount, the damages are unliquidated. Id. And an affidavit of…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Flagship Nat'l Bank OF Miami v. Gray Distrib. Sys., Inc., 432 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Szucs v. Qualico Dev., Inc., 893 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- United States Fire Ins. Co. v. C & C Beauty Sales, Inc., 674 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
- Meldon Rich v. Essie Spivey and Mary Grimsley, 922 So. 2d 326 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)
- Medcom USA, Inc. v. Ryder Homes & Groves Co., 847 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)
- Holiday Gulf Builders, Inc. v. Tahitian Gardens Condo., Inc., 443 So. 2d 143 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)