Venus Laboratories, Inc. v. Katz

557 So. 2d 110, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 695, 1990 WL 8678
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 6, 1990·No. No. 89-1783·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendants’ failure twice to satisfactorily answer the plaintiffs’ interrogatories did not justify striking their pleadings and entering a default against them. See Summit Chase Condominium Ass’n v. Protean Investors, Inc., 421 So.2d 562 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). Accordingly, the orders under review are reversed without prejudice to consideration of any appropriate lesser sanction.

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

Venus Laboratories, Inc. v. Katz, 557 So. 2d 110, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 695, 1990 WL 8678 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

557 So. 2d 110 (Venus Laboratories, Inc. v. Katz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

New Hampshire Ins. Co. v. Royal Ins. Co.
559 So. 2d 102 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)