From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Techno Indus. Corp. v. Cooper Indus

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Mar 23, 1982
410 So. 2d 584 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Opinion

No. 81-278.

February 23, 1982. Rehearing Denied March 23, 1982.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Dan Satin, J.

McCormick, Bedford Backmeyer and Gerald L. Bedford, Leonardo P. Mendez, Miami, for appellants.

High, Stack, Lazenby, Bender, Palahach Lacasa and R. Scott Boundy, Coral Gables, for appellee.

Before HENDRY, SCHWARTZ and BASKIN, JJ.


The trial judge struck the defendants' pleadings and entered a default judgment against them because counsel filed a second motion to dismiss eleven days, rather than an answer ten days subsequent to an agreed order which so required. This was much too harsh a sanction for the minor dereliction involved and thus constituted a plain abuse of discretion. Maqueira v. Almas, 409 So.2d 199 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Beaver Crane Service, Inc. v. National Surety Corp., 373 So.2d 88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). Accordingly, the judgment under review is

An answer was in fact filed, after the default had been entered, twelve days after the agreed order.

Reversed.


Summaries of

Techno Indus. Corp. v. Cooper Indus

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Mar 23, 1982
410 So. 2d 584 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)
Case details for

Techno Indus. Corp. v. Cooper Indus

Case Details

Full title:TECHNO INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION, GIL LOZANO AND LEONOR ARANGO, APPELLANTS…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Mar 23, 1982

Citations

410 So. 2d 584 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Citing Cases

Thaw, Gopman & Associates, P.A. v. Jack J. Greenberg, M.D. & Associates, P.A.

We reverse the order denying the motion to vacate default filed by defendants Thaw, Gopman Assoc., P.A., and…

Summit Chase v. Protean Investors

Our reversals in this case and in many similar ones in the recent past demonstrate that this court will not…