PETERS MACHINERY CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
BLAIRSVILLE MACHINE PRODUCTS CO., INC., A PENNSYLVANIA CORP., APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the defendant's appeal regarding the default judgment fails due to an insufficient record and lack of a meritorious defense, but the award of attorney's fees is reversed due to lack of notice.
Peters Machinery Corporation appealed a final judgment entered against it after the trial court refused to set aside a default and subsequent final ju…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Setting Aside Default Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Peters Machinery Corporation, defendant below, appeals from a final judgment entered against it and alleges as error the trial court’s failure to set aside a default and subsequent final judgment. A second, but collateral issue with regard to attorney’s fees awarded by the trial court is also claimed as error. As to the first issue, the appellant has failed to provide a proper record for our review. Accordingly, we presume the trial court’s findings following an evidentiary hearing are correct. Fricke v. Gaines Construction Co., 105 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1958). Nor did Peters allege a meritorious defense required by Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.540. GACL, Inc. v. Zeger, 276 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1973). The claim was liquidated and judgment entered on plaintiff’s theory of money had and received was proper. Bird v. International Graphics, Inc., 374 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1979).
The second issue presented, regarding attorney’s fees, has merit and we reverse that portion of the judgment. Peters was entitled to notice of the unliquidated claim of attorney’s fees and was entitled to contest the propriety and the amount of the fees. Scott v. Johnson, 386 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1980); Lyle v. Lyle, 167 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1964).
Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded for further proceedings,
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Tuttle v. Miami Dolphins, Ltd., 551 So. 2d 477 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…to support the judgment.”). Where, then, the appellant does not satisfy this burden of demonstrating error in the record, the appellate court will invoke the presumption of correctness, see Peters Machinery Corp. v. Blairsville Machine Products Co., 413 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Damkohler v. Damkohler, 336 So. 2d 1243; Strickland v. Jacobs, 235 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970), and “[tjhere being no record of what evidence the court considered,” affirm. Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Okun, 485 So. 2d 897, 89…
-
Larjim Mgmt. Corp. & Lawrence Gordon v. Cap. Bank, 554 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…and deposit the checks on behalf of the Partnership. We must therefore assume that the trial court correctly decided that issue. Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla.1979); Peters Mach. Corp. v. Blairsville Mach. Prod. Co., 413 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Starks v. Starks, 423 So. 2d 452 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Gordon argues that he had no relationship with Capital Bank which could render him liable for indemnification. We disagree. The obligation to indemnify need not derive from a…
-
Mathews Corp. v. Green's Pool Serv., 584 So. 2d 1006 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…not properly proven below; damages need not be proven at all in this case given the aforesaid clerk’s default on this liquidated damages claim. Moore v. Boyd, 62 So. 2d 427, 429-30 (Fla.1952); Peters Machinery Corp. v. Blairsville Mach. Prods. Co., 413 So. 2d 802, 803 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); see also Bird v. International Graphics, Inc., 374 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.500(e). We have not overlooked the other points raised on the defendant’s motion for rehearing, but find no merit therein. The…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Lyle v. Lyle, 167 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- Scott v. Johnson, 386 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Jessie Marlow et ux. v. Bodiford, 276 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973)
- Guilden v. Ira Guilden, 105 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958)
- Fricke v. Gaines Constr. Co., 105 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958)
- Bird v. Int'l Graphics, Inc., 374 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)