Techno Indus. Corp. v. Cooper Indus., Inc.
This text of 410 So. 2d 584 (Techno Indus. Corp. v. Cooper Indus., 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.
Opinion
TECHNO INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION, Gil Lozano and Leonor Arango, Appellants,
v.
COOPER INDUSTRIES, INC., d/b/A Cooper Airmotive, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
McCormick, Bedford & Backmeyer and Gerald L. Bedford, Leonardo P. Mendez, Miami, for appellants.
High, Stack, Lazenby, Bender, Palahach & Lacasa and R. Scott Boundy, Coral Gables, for appellee.
Before HENDRY, SCHWARTZ and BASKIN, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
The trial judge struck the defendants' pleadings and entered a default judgment against them because counsel filed a second motion to dismiss eleven days, rather than an answer ten days subsequent to an agreed order which so required.[1] This was much too harsh a sanction for the minor dereliction involved and thus constituted a plain abuse of discretion. Maqueira v. Almas, 409 So.2d 199 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Beaver Crane Service, Inc. v. National Surety Corp., 373 So.2d 88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). Accordingly, the judgment under review is
Reversed.
NOTES
[1] An answer was in fact filed, after the default had been entered, twelve days after the agreed order.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
410 So. 2d 584, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/techno-indus-corp-v-cooper-indus-inc-fladistctapp-1982.