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

• Wilson v. Clark
  414 So. 2d 526· Fla. 1st DCA· 1982-04-01 ·cited 58×
  Ray Wilson appealed the denial of his motion to dismiss a complaint for lease cancellation and rescission filed by Effie Steele. The case was tried and judgment entered in Steele's favor, but she died before the personal representative could be substituted within the 90-day deadl
• Merced Hernandez-Rivera and Carlota Garcia-Vasquez v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  630 F.2d 1352· 9th Cir.· 1980-10-23 ·cited 58×
  The court held that while the appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals should have been considered timely filed due to unique circumstances, the Board properly dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction under 8 C.F.R. § 3.1(b)(2).
• Town OF Hialeah Gardens v. Hendry
  376 So. 2d 1162· Fla.· 1979-11-08 ·cited 58×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a dispute over when a trial court may vacate an order while an appeal is pending, holding that a trial judge retained authority under Rule 1.540(a) to correct a clerical mistake (the failure to mail a copy of an order) without appellate court le
• Alley v. Dodge Hotel
  501 F.2d 880· D.C. Cir.· 1974-07-23 ·cited 58×
  The court held that a pro se litigant's motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis, filed slightly beyond the deadline, should not be dismissed as untimely without an inquiry into whether the delay was due to excusable neglect.
• Radack v. Norwegian Am. Line Agency, Inc.
  318 F.2d 538· 2d Cir.· 1963-05-21 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the district court had the power to vacate a dismissal order under Rule 60(b)(6) when the clerk failed to provide notice of the dismissal, even if the grounds for vacating might otherwise be time-barred under Rule 60(b)(1).
• Bailey v. Sharp
  782 F.2d 1366· 7th Cir.· 1986-02-10 ·cited 57×
  The court held that a writ of mandamus should issue to reinstate the jury's judgment because the defendant's motion for a new trial was untimely and the district court lacked jurisdiction to grant it.
• Mrs. Betty Galuppi v. Viele
  232 So. 2d 408· Fla. 4th DCA· 1970-02-13 ·cited 57×
  A plaintiff sued a corporation for negligence stemming from a 1963 accident but later discovered she had named the wrong defendant. The Florida appellate court reversed a dismissal based on the statute of limitations, holding that amending the complaint to name the true individua
• Becerra v. Equity Imports, Inc.
  551 So. 2d 486· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-02-28 ·cited 56×
  Becerra and Horizon appealed a default judgment for breach of contract, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and civil theft. The court reversed the treble damages award for civil theft because the complaint failed to adequately plead the criminal intent required for that statutory c
• Cnty. Nat'l Bank OF N. Miami Beach v. Sheridan, Inc.
  403 So. 2d 502· Fla. 4th DCA· 1981-08-26 ·cited 56×
  County National Bank appeals the denial of its motion to vacate a default judgment entered in a garnishment proceeding. The court holds that the bank demonstrated excusable neglect, a meritorious defense, and due diligence, and therefore the default should be set aside under Flor
• Winters v. Teledyne Movible Offshore, Inc.
  776 F.2d 1304· 5th Cir.· 1985-11-22 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing the suit under Rule 4(j) for failure to serve the defendant within 120 days, as plaintiffs failed to show good cause for the delay.
• Birl v. Estelle
  660 F.2d 592· 5th Cir.· 1981-11-05 ·cited 54×
  A pro se litigant's failure to file an appeal within the prescribed time limit, without a showing of excusable neglect, deprives the court of jurisdiction.
• Fid. & Deposit Co. OF Md. v. Usaform Hail Pool, Inc.
  523 F.2d 744· 5th Cir.· 1975-11-20 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in vacating and reentering a judgment under F.R.Civ.P. 60(b) to allow a timely appeal when neither party had actual notice of the judgment's entry, the winning party was not prejudiced, and the losing party moved
• Woldarsky v. Woldarsky
  243 So. 2d 629· Fla. 1st DCA· 1971-02-09 ·cited 54×
  The trial court had the authority under Rule 1.540(b) to set aside and re-enter a final judgment to allow a party who had no notice or knowledge of its rendition to file a timely appeal.
• Lasky v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  235 F.2d 97· 9th Cir.· 1956-06-13 ·cited 54×
  The Tax Court lacked jurisdiction to vacate its final decision, and consequently, this court lacks jurisdiction to review a subsequent decision entered after the time for appeal had expired.
• Sec. Bank, N.A. v. Bellsouth Advertising & Publ'g Corp.
  679 So. 2d 795· Fla. 3d DCA· 1996-07-24 ·cited 53×
  Security Bank appeals the trial court's denial of its motion to set aside a final judgment in a garnishment proceeding brought by BellSouth. The court affirms the denial of the motion to set aside the default on liability but reverses and remands regarding the final judgment on d
• Caryl Antony Vaughn Gibbs v. AIR Canada
  810 F.2d 1529· 11th Cir.· 1987-02-26 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the indemnity provision did not cover the employee's theft, and Air Canada's own negligence precluded indemnification. The denial of the motion to vacate the default judgment was affirmed.
• Solaroll Shade & Shutter Corp., Inc. v. Bio-Energy Sys., Inc.
  803 F.2d 1130· 11th Cir.· 1986-11-10 ·cited 53×
  The court held that an attorney's negligent failure to respond to a motion does not constitute excusable neglect under Rule 60(b)(1), and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to vacate a judgment enforcing a settlement agreement.
• Fla. Aviation Acad. v. Charter AIR Ctr., Inc.
  449 So. 2d 350· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-04-03 ·cited 53×
  Florida Aviation Academy and related defendants appealed the trial court's denial of their motion to set aside a default judgment entered against them for allegedly owing Charter Air Center $88,844.75 plus interest and costs. The appellate court reversed, holding that the defenda
• C.K.S. Eng'rs, Inc. v. White Mountain Gypsum Co.
  726 F.2d 1202· 7th Cir.· 1984-01-30 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to vacate the default judgment, as the defendants' actions leading to the default were not excused.
• Wood v. Santa Barbara Chamber OF Commerce, Inc.
  705 F.2d 1515· 9th Cir.· 1983-05-20 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the dismissal of claims was proper, and the injunction against relitigation was appropriate, though modified to clarify its scope.
• Int'l Controls Corp. v. Vesco
  556 F.2d 665· 2d Cir.· 1977-06-03 ·cited 53×
  The court affirmed the denial of the motion to vacate the judgment, holding that the judgment was not void and that the nunc pro tunc date issue did not warrant vacatur.
• Spound v. Mohasco Indus., Inc.
  534 F.2d 404· 1st Cir.· 1976-04-16 ·cited 53×
  The court affirmed the lower court's judgment, finding one patent valid and infringed, another invalid, and denying penalty relief due to an untimely appeal.
• Stirling v. Chem. Bank
  511 F.2d 1030· 2d Cir.· 1975-02-11 ·cited 53×
  The court held that while the notices of appeal were untimely, the case should be remanded to the district court to determine if excusable neglect warrants an extension of time for filing.
• Metcalf v. Langston
  296 So. 2d 81· Fla. 1st DCA· 1974-06-18 ·cited 53×
  Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company appealed the trial court's denial of its motion to vacate a default judgment. The appellate court affirmed, holding that while the factual allegations of excusable neglect and meritorious defense might have warranted setting aside t
• Millinger v. Broward Cnty. Mental Health Div. & Risk Mgmt.
  672 So. 2d 24· Fla.· 1996-03-14 ·cited 52×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a Judge of Compensation Claims lacked authority to vacate and reenter a final workers' compensation order to allow a party a second opportunity to file a timely appeal. The Court disapproved the Third District's reasoning in New Washington Heig
• Hernandez v. Page
  580 So. 2d 793· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-04-30 ·cited 52×·via Excusable Neglect Standard
  Under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.070(j), "good cause" for failure to serve process within 120 days requires at least showing excusable neglect, which cannot be satisfied by simple inadvertence or mistake of counsel without more. An attorney's forgetting about a case until
• The Fla. Bar. in re Rules of Civil Procedure
  391 So. 2d 165· Fla.· 1980-10-09 ·cited 52×
  The Florida Supreme Court adopted revised and new Florida Rules of Civil Procedure effective January 1, 1981, addressing multiple procedural matters including class actions, depositions, interrogatories, disqualification of judges, and enforcement of judgments while explaining it
• Chuck "C.O." Beshear v. Weinzapfel
  474 F.2d 127· 7th Cir.· 1973-02-20 ·cited 52×
• In re Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure
  196 So. 2d 124· Fla.· 1967-03-01 ·cited 52×
  The Florida Supreme Court adopted comprehensive Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure effective December 31, 1967, establishing uniform procedural requirements for all criminal proceedings in state courts.
• United States v. O'Neil
  709 F.2d 361· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-11 ·cited 51×
  The court held that the government's appeal of the initial judgments was untimely because the district court's severance of counterclaims created final, appealable orders. The denial of Rule 60(b) motions was affirmed as they cannot substitute for a timely appeal.
• Smith v. Widman Trucking & Excavating, Inc.
  627 F.2d 792· 7th Cir.· 1980-08-01 ·cited 51×
  The court should not have set aside the final judgment based on alleged attorney misunderstanding without a more thorough record and client input.
• Thunder v. United States
  810 F.2d 817· 8th Cir.· 1987-02-06 ·cited 50×
  Violations of Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(c)(3)(D) are cognizable under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 if they demonstrate a fundamental defect or an omission inconsistent with fair procedure, and a pro se litigant's failure to appeal a prior motion denial due to ignorance of appeal rights is excusable.
• de Quinonez v. Honorable Julio Cesar Perez
  596 F.2d 486· 1st Cir.· 1979-03-30 ·cited 50×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing, finding the defendants' failure to bring a controlling statutory amendment to the court's attention inexcusable.
• Associated Med. Insts., Inc. v. Imperatori
  338 So. 2d 74· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-09-28 ·cited 50×
  Hialeah Hospital appeals a trial court's denial of its motion to set aside a default judgment in a wrongful death action. The appellate court reversed, finding that the hospital demonstrated excusable neglect through misfiling and presented meritorious defenses in its answer file
• Smiles v. Young
  271 So. 2d 798· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-01-08 ·cited 50×
  Defendants appealed the trial court's order vacating a settlement judgment in a personal injury case. The plaintiffs sought relief under Rule 1.540 based on alleged unilateral mistake and defendant misconduct regarding an undisclosed serious injury. The appellate court reversed,
• Evans v. Jones
  366 F.2d 772· 4th Cir.· 1966-09-14 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the appellate court cannot excuse a late filing, but the district court may extend the time for filing a notice of appeal upon a showing of excusable neglect.
• Szteinbaum v. Kaes Inversiones y Valores
  476 So. 2d 247· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-09-24 ·cited 49×
  A Florida appellate court holds that a complaint filed by a non-attorney on behalf of a corporation may be amended to cure the defect of unauthorized practice of law, rejecting the strict rule that such complaints are nullities incapable of amendment. The court emphasizes the str
• Varnes v. Local 91
  674 F.2d 1365· 11th Cir.· 1982-05-06 ·cited 49×
  A default judgment is void if the amended complaint asserting new claims, such as attorney's fees, is not personally served on a defaulting party as required by Rule 4.
• Dade Cnty. v. Lambert
  334 So. 2d 844· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-01-20 ·cited 49×
  In this personal injury case arising from a 1967 bus-automobile collision, the Florida appellate court reversed the directed verdict against Metropolitan Dade County while affirming the default judgment against the bus operator Willie Laster. The court held that a defaulting defe
• Smith v. Jackson Tool & DIE, Inc.
  426 F.2d 5· 5th Cir.· 1970-05-13 ·cited 49×
  The court held that vacating a judgment to allow a party to file a timely appeal, under Rule 60(b), was not reversible error when done to promote substantial justice and avoid prejudice, despite the motion being filed after the initial appeal period.
• Totura & Co., Inc. v. Williams
  754 So. 2d 671· Fla.· 2000-02-17 ·cited 48×
  The Florida Supreme Court consolidated two cases presenting conflicts about whether the 120-day service requirement in Rule 1.070(j) runs from filing a motion to amend or from entry of an order granting the motion, and whether a statute of limitations bars a claim when the motion
• Thompson v. Kerr-McGEE Ref. Corp.
  660 F.2d 1380· 10th Cir.· 1981-09-24 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the notice and summary statement provisions of the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act must be strictly complied with, and that the franchisee has a right to a jury trial for actual damages. The district court did not abuse its discretion in vacating a dismissal
• Travelers Ins. Co. v. Daisey Q. Bryson and Salvatore DeLuca
  341 So. 2d 1013· Fla. 4th DCA· 1977-01-07 ·cited 48×
  Travelers Insurance Company appeals the denial of its motion to vacate a default judgment entered when its counsel failed to appear at a hearing, despite filing an answer on the same day. The court reversed, holding that counsel's failure to calendar the hearing date constituted
• Fitzsimmons v. Yeager
  391 F.2d 849· 3d Cir.· 1968-02-19 ·cited 48×
  The court would affirm the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition for failure to exhaust state remedies, finding that excusable neglect might apply to the petitioner's late filing under state rules.
• Apolaro v. Falcon
  566 So. 2d 815· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-09-11 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing to set aside a default judgment when the delay in seeking relief was reasonable under the circumstances and no prejudice resulted.
• Gibraltar Serv. Corp. v. Lone & Assocs., Inc.
  488 So. 2d 582· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-04-30 ·cited 47×
  Gibraltar Service Corporation and Gibraltar Financial Corporation appeal the denial of their motion to vacate a default judgment entered against them. The court reversed, holding that the default was improperly entered because defendants' responsive pleadings were mailed on the s
• In re Cosmopolitan Aviation Corp. v. NEW York State Dep't OF Transp.
  763 F.2d 507· 2d Cir.· 1985-05-24 ·cited 47×
  Cosmopolitan lacked standing to appeal the bankruptcy court's order, and Flushing's appeal was dismissed for failing to file a timely notice of appeal.
• Turner v. Allen
  389 So. 2d 686· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-10-29 ·cited 47×
  Turner appeals from a default judgment entered against him in a negligence suit over a boat. The court reversed, holding that the clerk erroneously entered default against Turner despite his prior filings, and that notice was required before entry of final judgment on unliquidate
• Compton v. Alton S.S. Co., Inc.
  608 F.2d 96· 4th Cir.· 1979-10-05 ·cited 47×
  A default judgment entered due to a clear mistake of law by the court, awarding penalty wages under a statute inapplicable to the facts, can be vacated under Rule 60(b) to prevent an unconscionable outcome.
• Wentworth v. Johnson
  845 So. 2d 296· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-05-16 ·cited 46×
  In a dissolution of marriage case, the former wife appealed the trial court's dismissal of her attorney's fees claim because she filed her motion 61 days after the final judgment, exceeding Rule 1.525's mandatory 30-day deadline. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal for unt