Herrera v. Rolon

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Herrera v. Rolon

91 So. 3d 935, 2012 WL 2813869, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 11103

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 11, 2012

DocketNo. 3D11-1620

StatusPublished

This text of 91 So. 3d 935 (Herrera v. Rolon) 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

Herrera v. Rolon, 91 So. 3d 935, 2012 WL 2813869, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 11103 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

EMAS, J.

Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant’s amended motion to vacate default.

However, we do so without prejudice for the trial court to consider the appellant’s pending, but as yet unheard, “Renewed Motion to Vacate Default Based Upon Newly Discovered Evidence,” which on its face seeks relief under Rule 1.540(b), Florida Rule of Civil Procedure. We express no comment on the merits of that motion.

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

EMAS, J.

Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant’s amended motion to vacate default.

However, we do so without prejudice for the trial court to consider the appellant’s pending, but as yet unheard, “Renewed Motion to Vacate Default Based Upon Newly Discovered Evidence,” which on its face seeks relief under Rule 1.540(b), Florida Rule of Civil Procedure. We express no comment on the merits of that motion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

91 So. 3d 935, 2012 WL 2813869, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 11103, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/herrera-v-rolon-fladistctapp-2012.