Thaw, Gopman & Associates, P.A. v. Jack J. Greenberg, M.D. & Associates, P.A.
595 So. 2d 305, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 3839, 1992 WL 55259
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 24, 1992·No. No. 91-2759·Published·Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
We reverse the order denying the motion to vacate default filed by defendants Thaw, Gopman & Assoc., P.A., and Ronald Thaw. Under the circumstances of this case, the submission of motions to modify a stay and to dismiss the complaint instead of an answer as provided in the trial court’s order does not merit entry of a default. Joseph v. Marese, 534 So.2d 920 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Techno Indus. Corp. v. Cooper Indus., Inc., 410 So.2d 584 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).
Reversed and remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Thaw, Gopman & Associates, P.A. v. Jack J. Greenberg, M.D. & Associates, P.A., 595 So. 2d 305, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 3839, 1992 WL 55259 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).
595 So. 2d 305 (Thaw, Gopman & Associates, P.A. v. Jack J. Greenberg, M.D. & Associates, P.A.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Pierce v. Kroha
200 So. 3d 241 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2016)
Osheroff v. Osheroff
694 So. 2d 855 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)