Collins v. Collins

519 So. 2d 729, 1988 WL 7076
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 5, 1988
Docket87-2070
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 519 So. 2d 729 (Collins v. Collins) 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
Collins v. Collins, 519 So. 2d 729, 1988 WL 7076 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Opinion

519 So.2d 729 (1988)

James L. COLLINS, Appellant,
v.
Carolyn L. COLLINS, Appellee.

No. 87-2070.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

February 5, 1988.

*730 Jim D. Shumake of Jim D. Shumake, P.A., Naples, for appellant.

Tom Grogan, Naples, for appellee.

PARKER, Judge.

Appellant/husband seeks a review of a nonfinal order denying his motion to set aside a default and final judgment of dissolution of marriage.

The sole issue for our determination is whether the trial court erred in refusing to set aside the default final judgment.

We affirm the trial court.

A gross abuse of discretion must be shown before this court may reverse the denial of a motion to vacate a default judgment. Kapetanopoulos v. Herbert, 449 So.2d 947 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Here, no such abuse has been demonstrated by the appellant. The appellant has the burden to establish both excusable neglect and a meritorious defense. Excusable neglect must be proven by affidavit or other sworn statement, whereas a meritorious defense may be shown by either an unverified pleading or an affidavit. Gibraltar Service Corp. v. Lone & Associates, Inc., 488 So.2d 582 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986).

The record here is barren of any of the above instruments. The sole document before the trial court and this court is the appellant's unsworn motion to vacate the default judgment. That motion, by itself, has been deemed insufficient by this court to establish the requirements of a meritorious defense and excusable neglect necessary to vacate a default. Westinghouse Elevator Co. v. DFS Construction Co., 438 So.2d 125 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Abray Construction Co., Inc. v. Star Swimming Pools, Inc., 426 So.2d 1046 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).

Based upon our holding, it is not necessary to decide the merits of appellant's defenses which were asserted in the motion to vacate.

Affirmed.

SCHEB, A.C.J., and RYDER, J., concur.

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

Related

Geer v. Jacobsen
880 So. 2d 717 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)
AMERICAN NETWORK TRANSP. MANAGEMENT, INC. v. a Super-Limo Co., Inc.
857 So. 2d 313 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)
Hill v. Murphy
872 So. 2d 919 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)
COQUINA BEACH CLUB CONDOMINIUM v. Wagner
813 So. 2d 1061 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
DiSarrio v. Mills
711 So. 2d 1355 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Faulkner v. Faulkner
629 So. 2d 1100 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
Merrill Lynch v. HALLMARK INDUSTRIES
627 So. 2d 12 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
Pertz v. Zohar
556 So. 2d 459 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Ponderosa, Inc. v. Stephens
539 So. 2d 1162 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Lee v. Chung
528 So. 2d 1313 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Warthen v. Becker
528 So. 2d 1304 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
519 So. 2d 729, 1988 WL 7076, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/collins-v-collins-fladistctapp-1988.