LEON J. GRAPPELL, PETITIONER,
v.
LAUDERDALE RIVER PARK ESTATES, INC., A FLORIDA 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.
This case concerns whether a defendant who defaults due to a discovery violation still has a right to a jury trial on the issue of damages. The court held that a timely demand for a jury trial is not waived by a default, and the defendant is entitled to have damages assessed by a jury.
Yes, a defendant who has made a timely demand for a jury trial retains that right on the issue of damages even after a default is entered for failure to comply with a discovery order. The default does not obliterate the previously made demand.
“Striking defendant's answer and entering default for his failure to comply with a discovery order did not obliterate his timely demand for jury trial.”
This quote establishes that a default for discovery violations does not negate a prior jury trial demand.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant in a tort action made a timely demand for a jury trial. Subsequently, the defendant failed to comply with a discovery order, leading the…
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 Tort Action cases and more on FLexlaw
On certiorari we review an order denying a jury trial on damages in a tort action after default entered. See Brooks v. Owens, Fla.1957, 97 So.2d 693. Both parties had made timely demand for jury trial. By so doing, the defendant avoided waiving a jury and his right to jury trial as guaranteed by the state and federal constitutions was inviolate. See rule 2.1, F.R.C.P. 31 F.S.A. Striking defendant’s answer and entering default for his failure to comply with a discovery order did not obliterate his timely demand for jury trial. Nor could the plaintiff’s de-demand for jury trial be withdrawn without the defendant’s consent. Rule 2.1(d), Id. Notwithstanding the default, defendant was entitled to submit proofs and be heard on the triable issues as to damages. See Pan American World Airways v. Gregory, Fla.App.1957, 96 So.2d 669, 672, and cases cited. Such issues were triable by jury. Miller v. Rolfe, Fla.App.1957, 97 So.2d 132, 135. Therefore, we conclude that in denying jury trial on the damage issues the learned trial judge departed from essential .requirements of law, for which certiorari is granted and the order complained of is quashed.
It is so ordered.
HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Loiselle v. Flossie L. Gladfelter and Kenneth Gladfelter, 160 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)…mand for jury trial. He also cites as authority in support of his conclusion 30A Am.Jur., Judgments, § 218, p. 2932. The appellant relies in part upon the pronouncements of this court in Grappell v. Lauderdale River Park Estates, Inc., Fla.App.1961, 126 So. 2d 574, but we agree with the learned trial judge that this case is not factually analogous to the case at bar, and consequently requires the application of a different rule. In the Grappell case the defendant’s answer was stricken for his failure to compl…
-
Riley v. Gustinger, 235 So. 2d 364 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)…e also Wilhelm v. South Indian River Co., 98 Fla. 970, 124 So. 729; Moore v. Boyd, Fla.1952, 62 So. 2d 427, 430; Pan American World Airways, Inc. v. Gregory, Fla.App.1957, 96 So. 2d 669; Grappell v. Lauderdale River Parks Estate, Inc., Fla.App.1961, 126 So. 2d 574. It appears from the record that the defendant was deprived of his right to notice and an opportunity to participate in the trial on damages, and to have the damage issues tried before a jury inasmuch as the plaintiff had duly made request in the c…
-
Boston RUG Galleries, Inc. v. William Iselin & Co., Inc., 212 So. 2d 58 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968)…resulting prejudice to the defendant. The court’s duty to afford the defendant a trial by jury upon timely demand was not met with a resultant invasion of defendant’s guaranteed rights. Grappell v. Lauderdale River Park Estates, Inc., Fla.App.1961, 126 So. 2d 574. Accordingly, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for proceedings consistent herewith. Reversed. CROSS, J., and SMITH, SAMUEL S., Associate Judge, concur.…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Maxwell J. Brooks v. Owens, 97 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 1957)
- PAN Am. World Airways, Inc. v. Gregory, 96 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 3d DCA 1957)
- Julia Miller and Renick v. Smith, 97 So. 2d 132 (Fla. 1st DCA 1957)