INTERTRANS NAVIGATION, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
SEGUROS ST. PAUL DE VENEZUELA, C.A., 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.
Intertrans Navigation appealed an order denying its motion to set aside a default judgment under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540. The court affirmed, holding that service of process was valid and the defendant failed to demonstrate either excusable neglect or a meritorious defense required to vacate the default.
The court affirmed the denial of the motion to set aside the default judgment. Service of process on Ms. Shafronsky as Station Manager was valid under Florida Statute Section 48.081(1)(b), and the affidavits submitted failed to overcome the presumptive validity of the service by clear and convincing evidence. Additionally, defendant failed to establish both excusable neglect and a meritorious defense as required by Rule 1.540.
[1] A return of service constitutes prima facie evidence of proper service on a defendant corporation under Florida Statute Section 48.081(1)(b).
[2] Affidavits challenging the validity of service on a corporation must establish by clear and convincing evidence that a superior officer was available for service or that…
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“this return constituted prima facie evidence of proper service on the defendant corporation under Section 48.081(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1989)”
Establishes that service on the station manager satisfied statutory requirements for service on a corporation
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIntertrans Navigation, a corporation, was sued by Seguros St. Paul. The complaint was served on Susan Shafronsky, identified as Station Manager of the…
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 Service Of Process On Corporations cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal by the defendant Inter-trans Navigation, Inc. from an order denying a motion to set aside a final default judgment under Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.540. We affirm.
First, the service of process on the defendant corporation was not, as urged, an invalid service which failed to give the trial court in personam jurisdiction over the defendant. According to the return of service, the plaintiff’s complaint was served on “Susan Shafronsky as Station Mgr.... of defendant corporation in the absence of any superior as defined by Florida Statute, Section 48.081_” (R.9). Contrary to defendant’s contention, this return constituted prima facie evidence of proper service on the defendant corporation under Section 48.081(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1989).
Moreover, the affidavits filed by the defendant do not, as urged, overcome this presumptive validity in that (1) Mr. Martinez’ affidavit fails to establish by clear and convincing evidence that he was “the president or vice president, or other head of the corporation” and was otherwise available for service at the defendant’s business when service was perfected on Ms. Shafronsky, § 48.081(l)(a), (b), Fla.Stat. (1989), and (2) Ms. Shafronsky’s affidavit fails to establish by clear and convincing evidence what her exact position was with the defendant corporation and that she was not “a general manager” of same. § 48.081(l)(b), Fla. Stat. (1989); see Magazine v. Bedoya, 475 So. 2d 1035 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Montano v. Montano, 472 So. 2d 1377, 1378 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. dismissed, 474 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Slomowitz v. Walker, 429 So. 2d 797, 798-99 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983).
Second, no showing of excusable neglect or a meritorious defense was established below by the defendant’s affidavits — both of which were required in order to set aside the otherwise valid final judgment under Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.540. It was never established what Ms. Shafronsky did with the complaint she was served with, and the defendant corporation’s failure to train her in this respect cannot possibly constitute excusable neglect sufficient to excuse the defendant’s failure to respond timely to the complaint. See Gordon v. Kearns, 430 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 438 So. 2d 832 (Fla.1983); Farmers Prod. Credit Ass’n v. Emperador Seafoods, Inc., 416 So. 2d 889, 890 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Winter Park Arms v. Akerman, 199 So. 2d 107, 108-09 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967).
Moreover, the mere conclusory statements in Ms. Woods’ affidavit fail to establish any facts constituting a meritorious defense to the plaintiff’s claim. See Mathews Corp. v. Green’s Pool Serv., 15 F.L.W. D1801 (Fla. 3d DCA July 10, 1990); Tremblay v. Marck, 378 So. 2d 855, 856 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979), cert. denied, 389 So. 2d 1116 (Fla.1980); Bay Convalescent Center, Inc. v. Carroll, 352 So. 2d 900, 902-03 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977), cert. dismissed, 364 So. 2d 881 (Fla.1978).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited (11 total)
- Slomowitz v. E.O. Walker and Geneva Walker, 429 So. 2d 797 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)
- Winter Park Arms, Inc. v. Akerman, 199 So. 2d 107 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967)
- Crews v. The Dania Bank, 352 So. 2d 900 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)
- Tremblay v. Marck, 378 So. 2d 855 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)
- Magazine v. Bedoya, 475 So. 2d 1035 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
- Farmers Prod. Credit Ass'n v. Emperador Seafoods, Inc., 416 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
- Montano v. Montano, 472 So. 2d 1377 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
- Gordon v. Kearns, 430 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- City OF Coconut Creek v. Broward Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs, 430 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)
- Montano v. Montano, 474 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)