Bermuda Atlantic Line Ltd. v. Florida East Coast Railway Co.

622 So. 2d 489, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 7048, 1993 WL 247137
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 7, 1993·No. No. 92-2939·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Bermuda Atlantic Line Limited, appeals the denial of its motion for relief from a default judgment. The default was entered when appellant failed to appear at pretrial conference with a new attorney as required by the court’s order granting the motion to withdraw of the appellant’s former attorney. Appellant was not properly served by its attorney with the motion to withdraw, nor did appellant actually receive the order granting the former attorney’s motion.1 At the pretrial hearing, appellees made an oral application for default, of which appellants had no notice. Under these circumstances, we find that the trial court abused its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion for relief from the default judgment. Seinsheimer Co., Inc. v. Cobia Point Condominium Ass’n, 616 So.2d 1136 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). We therefore reverse.

ERVIN and WOLF, JJ., and CAWTHON, Senior Judge, concur.

Footnotes

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

Bermuda Atlantic Line Ltd. v. Florida East Coast Railway Co., 622 So. 2d 489, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 7048, 1993 WL 247137 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

622 So. 2d 489 (Bermuda Atlantic Line Ltd. v. Florida East Coast Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jean-Philippe Schneider v. Christian Tirikian
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2024
Corso v. Padmanabhan
796 So. 2d 1211 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)
Zeigler v. Huston
626 So. 2d 1046 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)