Tahiti Resorts, Inc. v. Dowling

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Tahiti Resorts, Inc. v. Dowling

446 So. 2d 189, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11820

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 14, 1984

DocketNo. 83-1813

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 446 So. 2d 189 (Tahiti Resorts, Inc. v. Dowling) 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

Tahiti Resorts, Inc. v. Dowling, 446 So. 2d 189, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11820 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Tahiti Resorts, Inc. challenges the trial court’s non-final order denying Tahiti’s motion to set aside default and final judgment. The record discloses that Tahiti Resorts has failed to make the required showing of both excusable neglect and a meritorious defense necessary for vacating a default. North Shore Hospital, Inc. v. Barber, 143 So.2d 849 (Fla.1962); Dade County v. Lambert, 334 So.2d 844 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). Furthermore, we have been presented with no authority to support appellant’s position that the automatic stay provisions of the Bankruptcy Act operate to void service of process. We therefore find the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Tahiti’s motion to set aside default and final judgment.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Tahiti Resorts, Inc. challenges the trial court’s non-final order denying Tahiti’s motion to set aside default and final judgment. The record discloses that Tahiti Resorts has failed to make the required showing of both excusable neglect and a meritorious defense necessary for vacating a default. North Shore Hospital, Inc. v. Barber, 143 So.2d 849 (Fla.1962); Dade County v. Lambert, 334 So.2d 844 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). Furthermore, we have been presented with no authority to support appellant’s position that the automatic stay provisions of the Bankruptcy Act operate to void service of process. We therefore find the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Tahiti’s motion to set aside default and final judgment.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

446 So. 2d 189, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 11820, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tahiti-resorts-inc-v-dowling-fladistctapp-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack