Excusable Neglect

1,860 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 85 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• N. Shore Hosp., Inc. v. Barber
  143 So. 2d 849· Fla.· 1962-07-03 ·cited 633×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed the District Court of Appeal's decision that vacated a trial court's order setting aside a default judgment in a medical malpractice case. The Court held that a trial court has inherent authority to vacate interlocutory defaults prior to final j
• Randle-Eastern Ambulance Serv., Inc. v. Vasta
  360 So. 2d 68· Fla.· 1978-05-18 ·cited 258×
  A plaintiff's voluntary dismissal under Rule 1.420(a)(1)(i) divests the trial court of jurisdiction to grant relief from that dismissal.
• Glenna Somero and Robert Somero v. Hendry Gen. Hosp.
  467 So. 2d 1103· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-05-01 ·cited 148×
  The appellate court reviewed an order dismissing a case for failure to timely substitute a deceased defendant's personal representative and an order denying a motion to set aside that dismissal.
• Seven Elves v. Eskenazi
  635 F.2d 396· 5th Cir.· 1981-01-26 ·cited 139×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying the motion to vacate the judgment, as the appellants were denied an adequate opportunity to present their case due to attorney neglect and unusual circumstances.
• Morton L. Ginsberg & MLG Props., Inc. v. Lennar Fla. Holdings
  645 So. 2d 490· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-10-05 ·cited 136×
  Ginsberg challenged a default judgment entered against him by Lennar, a mortgage holder, in a suit alleging conversion, waste, civil theft, and RICO violations. The court reversed the default judgment, holding that Lennar's amended complaint failed to state a cause of action beca
• B. C. Builders Supply Co., Inc. v. Maldonado
  405 So. 2d 1345· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-11-03 ·cited 132×
  B.C. Builders Supply Co. appeals a trial court's denial of its motion to vacate a default judgment. The court reverses, holding that the trial court grossly abused its discretion by failing to set aside the default where the defendant demonstrated excusable neglect and diligence
• Pittston Stevedoring Corp. & the Home Ins. Co. v. Dellaventura
  544 F.2d 35· 2d Cir.· 1976-07-01 ·cited 128×
  The court held that the 1972 amendments to the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act were intended to cover injuries occurring during loading and unloading between the ship and the first point of rest, and not thereafter.
• Betty K Agencies, Ltd. v. M/V Monada
  432 F.3d 1333· 11th Cir.· 2005-12-16 ·cited 125×
  Betty K Agencies sued Tidal Wave and the M/V MONADA for breach of a vessel charter agreement, seeking return of unearned charter hire and advances. The district court sua sponte dismissed the case with prejudice, citing Betty K's failure to answer a counterclaim and failure to pe
• Miller v. Fortune Ins. Co.
  484 So. 2d 1221· Fla.· 1986-03-06 ·cited 120×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that trial courts have jurisdiction under Rule 1.540(b) to grant relief from voluntary dismissals containing clerical or substantive errors reflecting mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect, rejecting the jurisdictional bar established in Randl
• Blunt v. United States
  244 F.2d 355· D.C. Cir.· 1957-04-18 ·cited 120×
  The court held that the trial judge's conduct, including improper characterization of evidence, erroneous exclusion of testimony, and coercive jury instructions, constituted reversible error requiring a new trial.
• BMW OF N. Am., Inc. v. Krathen
  471 So. 2d 585· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-06-12 ·cited 117×
  BMW appealed a judgment entered pursuant to an offer of judgment rule after the Krathens accepted BMW's settlement offer. BMW sought to vacate or modify the judgment, claiming that return of the vehicle was an implied condition precedent to the $20,500 settlement offer. The court
• Fla. Inv. Enters., Inc. v. The Ky. Co., Inc.
  160 So. 2d 733· Fla. 1st DCA· 1964-02-13 ·cited 104×
  Defendants appeal a default judgment entered when their attorney failed to file a responsive pleading, arguing excusable neglect based on a misunderstanding with opposing counsel and pending jury trials. The court reversed the judgment as to the corporate defendant and one indivi
• Terrie G. Viets v. Am. Recruiters Enters., Inc.
  922 So. 2d 1090· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-03-22 ·cited 101×
  Plaintiff Terrie Viets appealed the denial of her motion to vacate a default judgment and attorney's fees award entered against her after she failed to comply with administrative orders and appear at a case management conference. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, find
• Schwab & Co., Inc. v. Breezy BAY, Inc.
  360 So. 2d 117· Fla. 3d DCA· 1978-06-13 ·cited 100×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in denying Schwab's motion to set aside default and final judgment, and that Schwab's argument regarding lack of notice for the final judgment hearing was without merit.
• Tozer v. Charles A. Krause Milling Co.
  189 F.2d 242· 3d Cir.· 1951-05-07 ·cited 96×
  The court held that the district judge abused his discretion in refusing to set aside a default judgment because the defendant's neglect was not gross and the defense raised was meritorious.
• Braden v. The Univ. OF Pittsburgh & Wesley W. Posvar
  552 F.2d 948· 3d Cir.· 1977-03-11 ·cited 91×
  A district court may vacate and reenter its certification order to allow a timely interlocutory appeal when neither party had notice due to court error, the prevailing party is not prejudiced, and the losing parties acted promptly upon learning of the order. The court also held t
• Toney Gomes, Jr. v. Williams
  420 F.2d 1364· 10th Cir.· 1970-01-13 ·cited 86×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to set aside the default judgment, as the defendant failed to show excusable neglect or a meritorious defense, and did not establish that notice was required under Rule 55(b)(2).
• Sanchez v. Bd. OF Regents OF Tex. S. Univ.
  625 F.2d 521· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-25 ·cited 85×
  The court held that the motion to dismiss for untimely notice of appeal is denied, and the case is remanded for the district court to consider excusable neglect.
• In re Mason v. Integrity Ins. Co. & Sherwood & Roberts, Inc.
  709 F.2d 1313· 9th Cir.· 1983-07-06 ·cited 83×
  The court held that an order for relief in an involuntary bankruptcy proceeding is a final, appealable order, and that the debtor waived his right to object to the order based on an insufficient number of petitioning creditors.
• Geer v. David Neal Jacobsen, Brian James Almengual, & Almengual & Warner, P.A.
  880 So. 2d 717· Fla. 2d DCA· 2004-05-07 ·cited 81×
  Paula Geer appeals a trial court order vacating a default judgment against Almengual. The appellate court reverses, holding that Almengual failed to establish excusable neglect and a meritorious defense necessary to set aside the default and default judgment.
• Silas v. Sears
  586 F.2d 382· 5th Cir.· 1978-12-14 ·cited 80×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying the Rule 60(b) motion because dismissal was too severe a sanction for the attorney's neglect.
• Quillie B. Woodham v. The Am. Cystoscope Co. OF Pelham
  335 F.2d 551· 5th Cir.· 1964-08-03 ·cited 80×
  The court held that dismissal of a complaint for an attorney's failure to comply with local rules, without notice or hearing, was an improper and overly harsh sanction, especially when the client was not at fault.
• Lavespere v. Niagara Mach. & Tool Works, Inc.
  910 F.2d 167· 5th Cir.· 1990-08-13 ·cited 76×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in considering a late-filed expert deposition under Rule 59(e) and that the expert was qualified under Rule 702.
• B/G Amusements, Inc. v. Mystery FUN House, Inc.
  381 So. 2d 318· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-03-19 ·cited 74×
  B/G Amusements appeals from a default judgment for $13,725.60 in a landlord-tenant dispute. The court affirmed the default entry but reversed and remanded for a new trial on damages, holding that the 1977 amendment to Rule 1.440(c) requires notice to a defaulted defendant in suit
• Crystal Lake Golf Course, Inc. v. Kalin
  252 So. 2d 379· Fla. 4th DCA· 1971-09-17 ·cited 74×
  Crystal Lake Golf Course sought to evict defendant Kalin for nonpayment of rent under a summary eviction procedure. The trial court entered judgment against defendant after defendant's counsel failed to appear at a pretrial conference. The appellate court reversed, holding that e
• Fla. Dep't OF Child. & Fam. Servs. v. P.E.
  14 So. 3d 228· Fla.· 2009-07-16 ·cited 72×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict among district courts regarding whether the Department of Children and Family Services must present evidence of statutory grounds for termination when a parent's consent to termination is entered under section 39.801(3)(d) due to fail
• Gulf Maint. & Supply, Inc. v. Barnett Bank OF Tallahassee
  543 So. 2d 813· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-05-04 ·cited 72×
  Gulf Maintenance and its principals appealed the denial of their motion to set aside a default judgment entered by Barnett Bank. The court reversed, finding the default was improperly entered without required notice under Florida Rule 1.500(b) and the final judgment was void beca
• Mrs. Julian Lamar Davis v. Parkhill-Goodloe Co., Inc.
  302 F.2d 489· 5th Cir.· 1962-05-02 ·cited 72×
  The court held that a shipowner's policy of leaving life vest use to the discretion of inexperienced seamen, despite industry standards and its own safety plan, constitutes negligence as a matter of law. The trial court's finding of no negligence was based on a misapprehension of
• Textile Banking Co., Inc. v. Rentschler
  657 F.2d 844· 7th Cir.· 1981-04-17 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the appeal of the default judgment order was untimely, but affirmed the denial of the Rule 60(b) motion because the district court had jurisdiction and did not abuse its discretion.
• United States v. Houser
  804 F.2d 565· 9th Cir.· 1986-11-17 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding excusable neglect for the late filing of the notice of appeal, and that the admission of prior conviction evidence was not plain error.
• Pansy O. Carlton v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
  621 So. 2d 451· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-03-16 ·cited 67×
  Carlton appealed the dismissal of her negligence action against Walmart for failure to serve process within 120 days as required by Florida Rule 1.070(j). The court reversed, holding that Carlton established good cause for the delay because her attorney reasonably believed Walmar
• Garcia Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Diaz
  351 So. 2d 1137· Fla. 2d DCA· 1977-11-18 ·cited 67×
  An insurance agency appeals the trial court's denial of its motion to set aside a default judgment in a negligence action brought by insureds. The appellate court reversed, holding that the agency demonstrated excusable neglect and diligence sufficient to overcome the default whe
• Kit C. Edwards v. City OF Fort Walton Beach
  271 So. 2d 136· Fla.· 1972-12-20 ·cited 66×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict between District Court decisions regarding whether an insurance company's negligence in defending a case constitutes excusable neglect under Rule 1.540(b). The court held that while misplaced reliance on an insurance company is not au
• Siegler v. Empire Dawn, LLC
  321 So. 3d 692· Fla. 5th DCA· 2022-04-08 ·cited 65×
  An appellant's failure to serve a timely response to a motion for summary judgment that properly addresses the movant's factual assertions in compliance with Rule 1.510(c)(5) is not excusable neglect based on attorney misunderstanding of procedural rules.
• Maounis v. Igor Shamis
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2023-08-02 ·cited 64×
  The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's decision in a dispute between Susan Maounis and Igor Shamis, upholding rulings on service of process, default judgment, and liquidated damages claims under Florida law.
• Chipser v. Kohlmeyer & Co.
  600 F.2d 1061· 5th Cir.· 1979-07-20 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict because there was substantial evidence supporting at least one of the plaintiff's claims, but a new trial is required due to errors in jury instructions regarding damages and contract inter
• Fisher v. John Carter & Assocs., Inc.
  864 So. 2d 493· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-01-07 ·cited 63×
  Fisher appeals an award of attorneys' fees to Carter & Associates under section 57.105, Florida Statutes, following dismissal of Fisher's five-count complaint for breach of contract, shareholder derivative suit, accounting, whistleblower retaliation, and breach of fiduciary duty.
• Doctor's Hosp. OF Hollywood, Inc. v. Hunter W. Madison
  411 So. 2d 190· Fla.· 1982-03-04 ·cited 63×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict between district courts on whether an order denying a motion to vacate a default judgment is appealable. The Court held that such orders are appealable under Rule 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iv) because they determine the issue of liability, and r
• Inryco, Inc. v. Metro. Eng'g Co., Inc.
  708 F.2d 1225· 7th Cir.· 1983-05-23 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the defendants' conduct, including their counsel's repeated failures to appear, respond to discovery, and comply with court orders, constituted inexcusable neglect, and thus the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to vacate the de
• Farina v. Mission Inv. Tr.
  615 F.2d 1068· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-23 ·cited 62×
  The federal district court had subject matter jurisdiction, and its dismissal of the plaintiff's suit and entry of summary judgment for the defendants were not an abuse of discretion due to the plaintiff's failure to prosecute diligently and lack of sufficient summary judgment pr
• Robert M. Gibson et ux. v. Buice
  381 So. 2d 349· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-03-26 ·cited 62×
  The trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion for relief from judgment when the court failed to provide formal notice of the judgment's entry as required by rule.
• Cadillac Fairview OF Fla., Inc. v. Cespedes
  468 So. 2d 417· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-04-30 ·cited 61×
  A carpenter injured in a construction accident sued the developer Cadillac Fairview for negligence. The court affirmed a jury verdict finding Cadillac 85% negligent and awarding $750,000 in damages, rejecting Cadillac's claims of workers' compensation immunity and holding that as
• Thos. P. Gonzalez Corp. v. Consejo Nacional de Produccion de Costa Rica
  614 F.2d 1247· 9th Cir.· 1980-03-10 ·cited 61×
  The court held that the defendant foreign state lacked sufficient minimum contacts with California to establish personal jurisdiction, rendering the default judgment void and requiring dismissal.
• Winter Park Arms, Inc. v. Akerman
  199 So. 2d 107· Fla. 4th DCA· 1967-05-25 ·cited 61×
  A default judgment will not be set aside for gross negligence or failure to employ counsel; a corporation must allege and prove excusable neglect of its officers or agents.
• Invst Fin. Grp., Inc. v. Chem-Nuclear Sys., Inc.
  815 F.2d 391· 6th Cir.· 1987-03-31 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the district court erred in entering a default judgment against Chem-Nuclear due to attorney neglect, as the neglect was excusable and the defendant had meritorious defenses, and that sanctions under Rule 11 were improperly imposed on the attorney for certain
• R.E. Rodgers and Barbara Rodgers v. Watt
  722 F.2d 456· 9th Cir.· 1983-12-16 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting relief from judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(1) based on excusable neglect, allowing a timely appeal.
• Erick Rios Bridoux v. E. Air Lines, Inc.
  214 F.2d 207· D.C. Cir.· 1954-02-11 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the defendant should be relieved from the default judgment due to lack of notice and excusable neglect, but the dismissal of his counterclaim was affirmed.
• Westinghouse Elevator Co. v. DFS Constr. Co. & Fed. Ins. Co.
  438 So. 2d 125· Fla. 2d DCA· 1983-09-16 ·cited 59×
  A party seeking to vacate a default judgment must establish both excusable neglect and a meritorious defense, and a general denial in an unverified answer is insufficient to establish a factual defense.
• T.I.E. Commc'ns, Inc. v. Toyota Motors Ctr., Inc.
  391 So. 2d 697· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-12-02 ·cited 59×
  The court held that the trial court correctly refused to vacate the default judgment because T.I.E. Communications, Inc. failed to show excusable neglect and its motion to vacate was untimely and frivolous.
• Sterling Drug, Inc. v. Wright
  342 So. 2d 503· Fla.· 1977-02-03 ·cited 59×
  Sterling Drug, a foreign corporation, failed to receive service of process due to a clerical error by its resident agent, resulting in a default judgment of $500,000. The Florida Supreme Court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in vacating the default based on