YURDANUR YERALAN RICE, APPELLANT,
v.
ALBERT S. JAMES, III AND ROBERT SHUMAN JAMES, AS ADMINISTRATORS AND SOLE HEIRS OF THE ESTATE OF ALBERT S. JAMES, JR., 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 reversed the trial court's denial of a motion to set aside a default judgment where the appellant demonstrated excusable neglect, due diligence, and meritorious defenses, as Florida policy favors resolution on the merits.
A default judgment must be set aside under Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.540(b) when the movant demonstrates excusable neglect, due diligence, and a meritorious defense.
[1] A default judgment must be set aside when the movant establishes excusable neglect, due diligence in pursuing relief, and a meritorious defense, regardless of credibility…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“Florida courts have a longstanding policy favoring adjudications on the merits”
Court explaining why default judgments should be set aside when statutory requirements are met, even if the defendant's credibility is questioned.
Appellant Rice sought to set aside a default judgment entered against her in a case involving the administrators and heirs of an estate.…
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 Florida Rule Of Civil Procedure 1.540(B) Relief From Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
ALLEN, J.
The appellant challenges an order by which the court refused to set aside a judgment entered upon a default. The appellant’s motion to set aside the judgment was filed under Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.500(d), which provides that the judgment may be set aside in accordance with Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.540(b).
Such relief may be had on a showing of excusable neglect, due diligence in pursuing relief, and the assertion of a meritorious defense. E.g., Markowski v. Attel Bank Int, 701 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 8d DCA 1997).
In the present case the court found excusable neglect, and there does not appear to be any question as to the appellant’s due diligence. The appellant also asserted meritorious defenses in sworn pleadings accompanying her motion to set aside the judgment. Although the appellees have suggested that the appellant’s credibility is suspect, and that she would not ultimately prevail on the facts, these are matters which may be pursued at a trial on the merits. As emphasized in cases such as Markowski, Florida courts have a longstanding policy favoring adjudications on the merits, and inasmuch as the appellant satisfied the requirements for relief in accordance with rule 1.540(b) the judgment should have been set aside. The appealed order is therefore reversed and the case is remanded.
WEBSTER and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Household Fin. Corp., III v. Mitchell, 51 So. 3d 1238 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)…on to set aside a default, “meritorious” means simply that the defendant plans to raise a defense that may have some merit. The movant need only show that the defense it has raised is meritorious, not that it is likely to succeed. See Rice v. James, 740 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). A general denial does not rise to the level of a meritorious defense. See, e.g., Rivera v. Dep’t of Revenue ex rel. Rivera, 899 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). However, affirmative defenses, even when pled with minimal specifici…
-
Seay Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. Locklin, 965 So. 2d 325 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)…n to vacate the final judgment because of “mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect” should be granted “on a showing of excusable neglect, due diligence in pursuing relief, and the assertion of a meritorious defense.” See Rice v. James, 740 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (emphasis added). We hold that Locklin failed to demonstrate due diligence. See Hepburn v. All Am. Gen. Constr. Corp., 954 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (holding that setting aside a default judgment was reversible error becau…
Authorities Cited
- Markowski v. Attel Bank Int'l, 701 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)