Pieco, Inc. v. Sunset Amoco West, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Pieco, Inc. v. Sunset Amoco West, Inc.

597 So. 2d 972, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 5471, 1992 WL 98320

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 12, 1992

DocketNo. 91-2519

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 597 So. 2d 972 (Pieco, Inc. v. Sunset Amoco West, 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

Pieco, Inc. v. Sunset Amoco West, Inc., 597 So. 2d 972, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 5471, 1992 WL 98320 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the order denying Pieco, Inc.’s [Pieco] motion to set aside a default. Pieco met the requirements for vacating a default by: demonstrating excusable neglect for failing to respond to the complaint, Cinkat Transp., Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co., 596 So.2d 746 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Hialeah, Inc. v. Adams, 566 So.2d 350 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 576 So.2d 284 (Fla.1990); Okeechobee Imports, Inc. v. American Sav. & Loan Ass’n of Fla., 558 So.2d 506 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); asserting a meritorious defense in its proposed answer, Cinkat; Atlantic Asphalt & Equip. Co. v. Mairena, 578 So.2d 292 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Fortune Ins. Co. v. Sanchez, 490 So.2d 249 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); and acting with reasonable promptness in moving to set aside the default. Cinkat; Atlantic Asphalt & Equip. Co.

Reversed and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the order denying Pieco, Inc.’s [Pieco] motion to set aside a default. Pieco met the requirements for vacating a default by: demonstrating excusable neglect for failing to respond to the complaint, Cinkat Transp., Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co., 596 So.2d 746 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Hialeah, Inc. v. Adams, 566 So.2d 350 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 576 So.2d 284 (Fla.1990); Okeechobee Imports, Inc. v. American Sav. & Loan Ass’n of Fla., 558 So.2d 506 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); asserting a meritorious defense in its proposed answer, Cinkat; Atlantic Asphalt & Equip. Co. v. Mairena, 578 So.2d 292 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Fortune Ins. Co. v. Sanchez, 490 So.2d 249 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); and acting with reasonable promptness in moving to set aside the default. Cinkat; Atlantic Asphalt & Equip. Co.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

597 So. 2d 972, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 5471, 1992 WL 98320, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pieco-inc-v-sunset-amoco-west-inc-fladistctapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack