DeHarriet v. Pinedo

District Court of Appeal of Florida

DeHarriet v. Pinedo

511 So. 2d 1130, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2162, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 10181

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 9, 1987·No. No. 87-0285·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Based on what was brought before this court, reversal is insupportable. As was said in Zimmerman v. Vinylgrain Industries of Jacksonville, Inc., 464 So.2d 1353, 1354 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), echoing North Shore Hospital, Inc. v. Barber, 143 So.2d 849, 853 (Fla.1962), “[i]f there is any reasonable doubt in the matter of vacating a default, it should be resolved in favor of granting the application and allowing the trial upon the merits.” Accordingly, we affirm.

HERSEY, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Based on what was brought before this court, reversal is insupportable. As was said in Zimmerman v. Vinylgrain Industries of Jacksonville, Inc., 464 So.2d 1353, 1354 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), echoing North Shore Hospital, Inc. v. Barber, 143 So.2d 849, 853 (Fla.1962), “[i]f there is any reasonable doubt in the matter of vacating a default, it should be resolved in favor of granting the application and allowing the trial upon the merits.” Accordingly, we affirm.

HERSEY, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.

DeHarriet v. Pinedo, 511 So. 2d 1130, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2162, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 10181 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

511 So. 2d 1130 (DeHarriet v. Pinedo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related