BRICKELL TRAVEL MANAGEMENT, LLC
v.
APOGEE LEADERSHIP, LLC
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.
Brickell Travel Management, LLC appealed the denial of its motion to vacate a default final judgment in favor of Apogee Leadership, LLC. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the denial of the motion to vacate but reversed the final judgment to the extent it awarded unliquidated damages and remanded for a properly noticed evidentiary hearing.
While a defaulting party's right to contest liability is terminated by entry of default, the party retains a due process entitlement to notice and a hearing to determine the amount of unliquidated damages. The court reversed the judgment to the extent it awarded unliquidated damages without a properly noticed evidentiary hearing and remanded for such a hearing.
[1] A defaulting party has a due process right to notice and an evidentiary hearing to contest unliquidated damages, even though entry of default eliminates the defendant's r…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“while entry of a default terminates the defendant's right to contest liability or the plaintiff's entitlement to liquidated damages, entry of a default does not deprive the defendant of the right to a hearing to determine damages which are unliquidated”
Court citing Kotlyar v. Metro. Cas. Ins. Co. regarding the distinction between liquidated and unliquidated damages in default judgments
A default final judgment was rendered in favor of Apogee Leadership, LLC against Brickell Travel Management, LLC. The judgment included an award of un…
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
Opinion filed March 30, 2022. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________ No. 3D21-1323 Lower Tribunal No. 19-27777 ________________
Brickell Travel Management, LLC,
Appellant,
vs.
Apogee Leadership, LLC,
Appellee.
An appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Beatrice Butchko, Judge. Xander Law Group, P.A., and Wayne R. Atkins, for appellant. Miguel A. Brizuela, P.A., and Miguel A. Brizuela, for appellee. Before SCALES, MILLER, and GORDO, JJ. PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Brickell Travel Management, LLC, challenges an order denying its motion to vacate a default final judgment rendered in favor of appellee, Apogee Leadership, LLC. We affirm the denial, but we reverse the final judgment to the extent it awarded unliquidated damages and remand for a properly noticed evidentiary hearing. See DYC Fishing, Ltd. v. Martinez, 994 So. 2d 461, 463 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (quoting Viets v. Am.
Recruiters Enters., Inc., 922 So. 2d 1090, 1095 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)) (“When unliquidated damages must be determined as a result of a default, the defaulting party ‘is entitled to notice of an order setting the matter for trial, and must be afforded an opportunity to defend.’”); Cellular Warehouse, Inc. v. GH Cellular, LLC, 957 So. 2d 662, 666 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (quoting
Bowman v. Kingsland Dev., Inc., 432 So. 2d 660, 663 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)) (“It is well settled that a defaulting party ‘has a due process entitlement to notice and opportunity to be heard as to the presentation and evaluation of evidence necessary to a judicial determination of the amount of unliquidated damages.’”); Kotlyar v. Metro. Cas. Ins. Co., 192 So. 3d 562, 565 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (“[W]hile entry of a default terminates the defendant’s right to contest liability or the plaintiff’s entitlement to liquidated damages, entry of a default does not deprive the defendant of the right to a hearing to determine damages which are unliquidated.”).
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Primus Hayes, 333 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976)…properly before it and decided in disposing of the case, are, until overruled by a subsequent case, binding as precedent on courts of lesser jurisdiction.”) Courts in other jurisdictions have decided this issue. In People v. Blount, 82 Misc.2d 964, 370 N.Y.S.2d 437 (Nassau County Ct. N.Y.1975), the court noted: “Where a question has not yet been decided by the appellate courts in a certain department, inferior courts in that department must follow the determinations of the appellate courts in any other depart…
Authorities Cited
- Flagship Nat'l Bank OF Miami v. Gray Distrib. Sys., Inc., 432 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Terrie G. Viets v. Am. Recruiters Enters., Inc., 922 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)
- Cellular Warehouse, Inc. v. GH Cellular, LLC, 957 So. 2d 662 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)
- DYC Fishing, Ltd. v. Martinez, 994 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)
- Stanislav Kotlyar v. Metro. Cas. Ins. Co., 192 So. 3d 562 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)