Anderson v. Carlozzi

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Anderson v. Carlozzi

571 So. 2d 4, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 2912, 1990 WL 52313

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 25, 1990·No. No. 89-00713·Published

Opinion

DANAHY, Acting Chief Judge.

The appellant, the defendant in the trial court, appeals an order denying a motion to vacate an order of default. We reverse because Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.500(c) specifically provides that if a party fails to plead or otherwise defend, the trial court may enter a default against such party. The appellant has demonstrated that he filed pleadings in this cause three months before the order of default was entered.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

HALL and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

DANAHY, Acting Chief Judge.

The appellant, the defendant in the trial court, appeals an order denying a motion to vacate an order of default. We reverse because Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.500(c) specifically provides that if a party fails to plead or otherwise defend, the trial court may enter a default against such party. The appellant has demonstrated that he filed pleadings in this cause three months before the order of default was entered.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

HALL and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.

Anderson v. Carlozzi, 571 So. 2d 4, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 2912, 1990 WL 52313 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

571 So. 2d 4 (Anderson v. Carlozzi) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related