Nasrallah v. Scheuermann

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Nasrallah v. Scheuermann

424 So. 2d 974, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18725

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 12, 1983

DocketNos. 81-127, 81-1763 and 81-1850

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 424 So. 2d 974 (Nasrallah v. Scheuermann) 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

Nasrallah v. Scheuermann, 424 So. 2d 974, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18725 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Upon review of the record and consideration of the briefs and argument on appeal we have concluded that the appellant Isabel Scheuermann has failed to demonstrate that the trial court erred in setting aside the default entered against appellee Aetna Casualty & Surety Company. B.C. Builders Supply Co., Inc. v. Maldonado, 405 So.2d 1345 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). In particular we believe the trial court was entitled to consider the nature of the relationship between all of the parties in the pending and prior litigation in determining whether or not excusable neglect had been established for the appellees’ failure to respond. However, we reverse the order as to the appellee Lydia Nasrallah, and remand with directions that she be given an opportunity to amend her motion to set aside the default and to establish thereby excusable neglect for her failure to respond to Scheuermann’s complaint. We do not believe the present record is sufficient to sustain the trial court’s ruling as to Nasrallah, although we believe that under the peculiar circumstances of this case Nasrallah, the insured of the appellee Aetna, should be given an opportunity to demonstrate grounds for setting aside the default.

Accordingly, the order of the trial court is affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.

ANSTEAD and HURLEY, JJ., and SHA-HOOD, GEORGE, Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Upon review of the record and consideration of the briefs and argument on appeal we have concluded that the appellant Isabel Scheuermann has failed to demonstrate that the trial court erred in setting aside the default entered against appellee Aetna Casualty & Surety Company. B.C. Builders Supply Co., Inc. v. Maldonado, 405 So.2d 1345 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). In particular we believe the trial court was entitled to consider the nature of the relationship between all of the parties in the pending and prior litigation in determining whether or not excusable neglect had been established for the appellees’ failure to respond. However, we reverse the order as to the appellee Lydia Nasrallah, and remand with directions that she be given an opportunity to amend her motion to set aside the default and to establish thereby excusable neglect for her failure to respond to Scheuermann’s complaint. We do not believe the present record is sufficient to sustain the trial court’s ruling as to Nasrallah, although we believe that under the peculiar circumstances of this case Nasrallah, the insured of the appellee Aetna, should be given an opportunity to demonstrate grounds for setting aside the default.

Accordingly, the order of the trial court is affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.

ANSTEAD and HURLEY, JJ., and SHA-HOOD, GEORGE, Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

424 So. 2d 974, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 18725, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nasrallah-v-scheuermann-fladistctapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack