VINCENZO BRUNO
v.
THOMAS DRECHSLER

Fla. 3d DCA | 2024-01-17
No. 2023-0697
342 So. 3d 748 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2024) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 338 So. 3d 408 · 344 So. 3d 634
Cited by 5 cases

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.

Holding

A trial court does not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to vacate a default judgment when the defendant fails to demonstrate excusable neglect, a meritorious defense, and due diligence in seeking relief.

Headnotes

[1] A motion to vacate a default judgment is reviewed under the abuse of discretion standard, and the trial court must determine whether the defendant has demonstrated: (1) e…

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
Facts & Procedural History

Vincenzo Bruno sued Thomas Drechsler. A default judgment was entered against Drechsler, who subsequently moved to vacate it.…

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.

Topics
Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings Meritorious Defense Judgment On The Pleadings Due Diligence

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

Opinion filed January 17, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D23-697 Lower Tribunal No. 19-11245

________________

Vincenzo Bruno, et al.,

Appellants,

vs.

Thomas Drechsler, et al.,

Appellees.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Valerie R. Manno Schurr, Judge. Sniffen & Spellman, P.A., and Robert J. Hauser (West Palm Beach), for appellants. Venable LLP, and Aaron S. Blynn, Jonathan E. Perlman and Avi Zemel, for appellees. Before MILLER, GORDO and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. Escobar v. Marino, 342 So. 3d 748, 748 (Fla. 3d DCA

2022) (“We review the denial of a motion to vacate a default under an abuse of discretion standard.” (quoting Universal Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v.

Dimanche, 338 So. 3d 408, 412 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022)); Schwartz v. Bus.

Cards Tomorrow, Inc., 644 So. 2d 611, 611 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (“[I]n setting aside a default, the trial court must determine inter alia (1) whether the defendant has demonstrated excusable neglect in failing to respond; (2) whether the defendant has demonstrated a meritorious defense; and (3) whether the defendant, subsequent to learning of the default, has demonstrated due diligence in seeking relief.”); Techvend, Inc. v. Phoenix

Network, Inc., 564 So. 2d 1145, 1146 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (“[I]t is uncontradicted that the defendant-appellant did not move to set aside the judgment until more than three months after it became aware of its existence . . . [i]t is entirely clear that such a delay constituted a lack of the due diligence which is required to justify setting aside a default.”); Kraus v.

Kraus, 344 So. 3d 634, 635 n.1 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (“We review a trial court’s order denying a motion for judgment on the pleadings de novo.”);

Perez Escalona v. City of Miami Beach, 227 So. 3d 722, 724 (Fla. 3d DCA

2017) (“A motion for judgment on the pleadings must be decided wholly on the pleadings and is granted only if the pleadings establish that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”) (internal quotations omitted);

Kraus, 344 So. 3d at 635 (“The trial court properly denied the [party’s] motion for judgment on the pleadings.”) (footnote omitted).

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Vincenzo Bruno v. Drechsler, 342 So. 3d 748 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)
    …DO and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Escobar v. Marino, 342 So. 3d 748, 748 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (“We review the denial of a motion to vacate a default under an abuse of discretion standard.” (quoting Universal Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Dimanche, 338 So. 3d 408, 412 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022)); Schwartz v. Bus. Cards Tomorrow, Inc., 644 So. 2d 611, 611 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (“[I]n setting aside a default, the trial court must determine inter alia (1) whether the defendant has demonstrated excusable neglect in faili…
    1 / 3
  • Ansaroff v. Laureles (Fla. 3d DCA 2026)
    …nsaroff raised no other issues on appeal. II. ANALYSIS "[A] party moving to set aside a default must show excusable neglect, a meritorious defense, and due diligence in moving to set aside the default." Universal Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Dimanche, 338 So. 3d 408, 413 (Fla. 3d 2 We have jurisdiction to review these orders under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.110(h). [*4] DCA 2022). The standard of review of an order granting a motion to vacate a default judgment is gross abuse of discretion. InClaim,…
  • Riot Jacques and Claire Jacques v. Reece Builders E. Coast Div., LLC (Fla. 4th DCA 2025)

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw