Sklar v. Brawley
This text of 651 So. 2d 1314 (Sklar v. Brawley) 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
Olga SKLAR, Appellant,
v.
Ann BRAWLEY, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Popper & Popper and Victor K. Rones, for appellant.
Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, Stanley B. Price and Eileen Ball Mahta, for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BARKDULL and BASKIN, JJ.
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
Because the plaintiff improperly took a default without notice after communicating with opposing counsel, who clearly indicated his intention to defend on the merits, see Ole, Inc. v. Yariv, 566 So.2d 812 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Gulf Maintenance & Supply, Inc. v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 543 So.2d 813 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), the default should have been set aside whether or not the answer raised a meritorious defense. Cardet v. Resolution Trust Corp., 563 So.2d 167, 169 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); J.A.R., Inc. v. Universal Am. *1315 Realty Corp., 485 So.2d 467 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Chester, Blackburn & Roder, Inc. v. Marchese, 383 So.2d 734, 735 n. 3 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).[1]
Reversed.
NOTES
[1] For this reason we express no view as to whether a "meritorious defense" was in fact presented.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
651 So. 2d 1314, 1995 WL 119108, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sklar-v-brawley-fladistctapp-1995.