Newkirk v. FLA. INS. GUARANTY ASS'N., INC.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Newkirk v. FLA. INS. GUARANTY ASS'N., INC.

464 So. 2d 1256, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 470

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 19, 1985

Docket84-772

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 464 So. 2d 1256 (Newkirk v. FLA. INS. GUARANTY ASS'N., INC.) 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

Newkirk v. FLA. INS. GUARANTY ASS'N., INC., 464 So. 2d 1256, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 470 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

464 So.2d 1256 (1985)

Sylvia NEWKIRK, Appellant,
v.
FLORIDA INSURANCE GUARANTY ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida Corporation, and Pic `N' Pay Supermarket # 9, Inc., a Florida Corporation, d/b/a Earl's Market, Appellees.

No. 84-772.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

February 19, 1985. Rehearing Denied April 1, 1985.

Wolfson & Diamond and Michael J. Schwartz, Miami Beach, for appellant.

Preddy, Kutner & Hardy and G. William Bissett, Miami, for appellees.

Before HENDRY, BASKIN and JORGENSON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Under the facts herein, section 631.67, Florida Statutes (1983), did not furnish a basis for vacating the default judgment in favor of Newkirk. Appellees were required to proceed under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b). Appellees' motions to vacate the default judgment did not sufficiently allege excusable neglect, nor did they aver the existence of a meritorious defense. Further, the motions were not supported by affidavit or other sworn statement. See B.C. Builders Supply Co. v. Maldonado, 405 So.2d 1345 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Thus, the trial court erred in setting aside the judgment in favor of Newkirk.

Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions to reinstate the judgment.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

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

464 So.2d 1256 (1985)

Sylvia NEWKIRK, Appellant,
v.
FLORIDA INSURANCE GUARANTY ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida Corporation, and Pic `N' Pay Supermarket # 9, Inc., a Florida Corporation, d/b/a Earl's Market, Appellees.

No. 84-772.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

February 19, 1985. Rehearing Denied April 1, 1985.

Wolfson & Diamond and Michael J. Schwartz, Miami Beach, for appellant.

Preddy, Kutner & Hardy and G. William Bissett, Miami, for appellees.

Before HENDRY, BASKIN and JORGENSON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Under the facts herein, section 631.67, Florida Statutes (1983), did not furnish a basis for vacating the default judgment in favor of Newkirk. Appellees were required to proceed under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b). Appellees' motions to vacate the default judgment did not sufficiently allege excusable neglect, nor did they aver the existence of a meritorious defense. Further, the motions were not supported by affidavit or other sworn statement. See B.C. Builders Supply Co. v. Maldonado, 405 So.2d 1345 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Thus, the trial court erred in setting aside the judgment in favor of Newkirk.

Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions to reinstate the judgment.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

464 So. 2d 1256, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 470, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/newkirk-v-fla-ins-guaranty-assn-inc-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Sylvia NEWKIRK, Appellant, v. FLORIDA INSURANCE GUARANTY ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida Corporation, and Pic `N' Pay Supermarket # 9, Inc., a Florida Corporation, d/b/a Earl's Market, Appellees.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Sylvia NEWKIRK, Appellant,
v.
FLORIDA INSURANCE GUARANTY ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida Corporation, and Pic `N' Pay Supermarket # 9, Inc., a Florida Corporation, d/b/a Earl's Market, Appellees.