Roney Plaza Associates, Ltd. v. Henry

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Roney Plaza Associates, Ltd. v. Henry

848 So. 2d 436, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 9920, 2003 WL 21502498

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 2, 2003

DocketNo. 3D02-1677

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 848 So. 2d 436 (Roney Plaza Associates, Ltd. v. Henry) 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

Roney Plaza Associates, Ltd. v. Henry, 848 So. 2d 436, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 9920, 2003 WL 21502498 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Roney Plaza Associates, Ltd. (“Roney”), appeals from the denial of its motion to vacate judgment and default. The record reflects that Roney demonstrated a meritorious defense to the action, established excusable neglect for its failure to respond to the complaint and notice of trial, and acted with due diligence in moving to set aside the default judgment. Thus it was an abuse of discretion for the trial court to refuse to set aside the default, and we reverse the order denying Roney’s motion to vacate judgment and default. See North Shore Hosp., Inc. v. Barber, 143 So.2d 849 (Fla.1962); Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Traveler, 699 So.2d 847 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Electric Engineering Co., Inc. v. General Elec. Can., Inc., 610 So.2d 51 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992).

Reversed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Roney Plaza Associates, Ltd. (“Roney”), appeals from the denial of its motion to vacate judgment and default. The record reflects that Roney demonstrated a meritorious defense to the action, established excusable neglect for its failure to respond to the complaint and notice of trial, and acted with due diligence in moving to set aside the default judgment. Thus it was an abuse of discretion for the trial court to refuse to set aside the default, and we reverse the order denying Roney’s motion to vacate judgment and default. See North Shore Hosp., Inc. v. Barber, 143 So.2d 849 (Fla.1962); Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Traveler, 699 So.2d 847 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Electric Engineering Co., Inc. v. General Elec. Can., Inc., 610 So.2d 51 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992).

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

848 So. 2d 436, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 9920, 2003 WL 21502498, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roney-plaza-associates-ltd-v-henry-fladistctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack