COLLEGE HEALTH II, GP, INC.
v.
VINCENZO DEPAU
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.
In this foreclosure action, College Health II, GP, Inc. appealed the trial court's denial of its motions to vacate a court default and resulting default judgment. College Health argued that the default should be lifted because the opposing counsel had actual knowledge of its representation through a notice of appearance filed in a related case. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's denial of the motions.
The court affirmed the trial court's denial of College Health's motions to vacate the default and default judgment. The applicable case law requires not only actual knowledge that the defaulting party is represented by counsel, but also actual knowledge that the defaulting party intends to defend against the lawsuit, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that Depau's counsel lacked knowledge of College Health's intent to defend.
[1] To require vacation of a default judgment based on opposing counsel's knowledge of the defaulting party's representation, counsel must have actual knowledge not only that…
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“This line of cases, however, requires not only 'actual knowledge' that the defaulting party is represented by counsel, but also, 'actual knowledge' that the defaulting party intends to defend against the lawsuit.”
The court explaining the applicable legal standard for vacating a default judgment
College Health was the plaintiff in a foreclosure action against Vincenzo Depau. College Health failed to respond appropriately, resulting in a court …
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 Vacating Default Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed October 27, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________ Nos. 3D19-1315 & 3D20-1179 Lower Tribunal No. 17-18931 ________________ College Health II, GP, Inc.,
Appellant,
vs.
Vincenzo Depau,
Appellee. Appeals from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jacqueline Hogan Scola and William Thomas, Judges. Crabtree & Auslander, and John G. Crabtree, Charles M. Auslander, Brian C. Tackenberg and Emily Cabrera, for appellant. Carey Rodriguez Milian, LLP, and Ruben Conitzer, David P. Milian, Bianca C. Alvarez and Jennifer M. Hernandez, for appellee. Before LOGUE, SCALES and LINDSEY, JJ. PER CURIAM.
In this foreclosure action, the trial court denied appellant College Health II, GP, Inc.’s (“College Health”) motions seeking to vacate a court default and resulting final default judgment.1 Citing a line of cases holding that a default must be lifted if the plaintiff's lawyer is aware that the defaulting defendant is represented by counsel,2 College Health asserts that the trial court was required to vacate the default and default final judgment because appellee Vincenzo Depau’s counsel was aware, by virtue of a notice of appearance filed in a related, but different, foreclosure case, that College Health was represented by counsel in the instant case. This line of cases, however, requires not only "actual knowledge" that the defaulting party is represented by counsel, but also, "actual knowledge" that the defaulting party intends to defend against the lawsuit. See Lloyd, 981 So. 2d at 640;
McWilliams, 799 So. 2d at 380; Gulf Maintenance & Supply, 543 So. 2d at
816. On this record, we are unable to conclude that the trial court abused its
discretion by determining that Depau’s counsel was not aware of College Health’s intention to defend against Depau’s foreclosure claim, and we are therefore compelled to affirm. Lloyd, 982 So. 2d 639 (recognizing that an order denying a motion to vacate a default is reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Gulf Maint. & Supply, Inc. v. Barnett Bank OF Tallahassee, 543 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Lloyd, 981 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)
- Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, P.A. v. McWILLIAMS, 799 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)