Kreiser Construction, Inc. v. Trafford
This text of 699 So. 2d 251 (Kreiser Construction, Inc. v. Trafford) 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.
Opinion
We find no error in the trial court striking pleadings for failure of a party to secure new counsel after original counsel withdrew. Commonwealth Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n v. Tubero, 569 So.2d 1271 (Fla.1990).
We do find error (which was conceded by the appellee) in the trial court, non-jury, fixing the amount of damages after a default was entered and a jury trial had been demanded. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.430; Curbelo v. Ullman, 571 So.2d 443 (Fla.1990); Ulrich v. Berton, 661 So.2d 376 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). Therefore, the final judgment is reversed and the matter is returned to the trial court for a jury trial on the amount of damages with proper notice accorded to all parties.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
699 So. 2d 251, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 6257, 1997 WL 311566, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kreiser-construction-inc-v-trafford-fladistctapp-1997.