BRICKELL TRAVEL MANAGEMENT, LLC v. APOGEE LEADERSHIP, LLC

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMarch 30, 2022
Docket21-1323
StatusPublished

This text of BRICKELL TRAVEL MANAGEMENT, LLC v. APOGEE LEADERSHIP, LLC (BRICKELL TRAVEL MANAGEMENT, LLC v. APOGEE LEADERSHIP, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
BRICKELL TRAVEL MANAGEMENT, LLC v. APOGEE LEADERSHIP, LLC, (Fla. Ct. App. 2022).

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

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.”).

2 Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

Bowman v. Kingsland Development, Inc.
432 So. 2d 660 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)
Cellular Warehouse, Inc. v. GH CELLULAR
957 So. 2d 662 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2007)
Viets v. AREI
922 So. 2d 1090 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2006)
DYC Fishing, Ltd. v. Martinez
994 So. 2d 461 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
BRICKELL TRAVEL MANAGEMENT, LLC v. APOGEE LEADERSHIP, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brickell-travel-management-llc-v-apogee-leadership-llc-fladistctapp-2022.