Excusable Neglect

1,860 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• Chinese Mar. Tr., Ltd. v. Carolina Shipping Co.
  456 F.2d 192· 4th Cir.· 1972-03-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the contributory negligence of a longshoreman is imputed to his stevedore, constituting a breach of the warranty of workmanlike performance, entitling the shipowner to indemnification when the vessel is free of fault.
• Pearson v. Arthur
  248 So. 2d 227· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-05-11 ·cited 4×
  In this mortgage foreclosure appeal, the court affirmed a summary judgment denying the mortgagees' right to accelerate the loan based on a late payment, holding that equitable principles prevent acceleration where the mortgagees had previously accepted late payments and the mortg
• WAY v. Gaffney
  434 F.2d 996· 10th Cir.· 1970-11-12 ·cited 4×
  An ex parte order extending the time for appeal is void ab initio if not made within the initial time allowed by Rule 4(a), F.R.App.P.
• United States v. Meyers
  406 F.2d 1015· 4th Cir.· 1969-01-31 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a defendant may be allowed a belated appeal if prevented from timely filing without fault.
• Lawrence v. Louie L. Wainwright
  401 F.2d 177· 5th Cir.· 1968-09-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that it lacks jurisdiction over the appeal because the notice of appeal was not timely filed within the prescribed 30-day period, with no extension granted.
• Bennett v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp.
  396 F.2d 909· 9th Cir.· 1968-06-29 ·cited 4×
  Denial of a Rule 60(b) motion to set aside a summary judgment for inadvertence or excusable neglect is reviewed for abuse of discretion, and such discretion is not abused when the moving party fails to make a substantial showing of excusable neglect and fails to present defenses
• F. W. Dodge Co. DIV. OF McGRAW-Hill, Inc. v. S. Indus. Sav. Bank
  207 So. 2d 516· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-02-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to set aside the default judgment against the garnishee.
• Naples v. Maxwell
  368 F.2d 219· 6th Cir.· 1966-11-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district judge erred in denying the motion to vacate the prior order granting a writ of habeas corpus, due to excusable neglect by state counsel.
• Martin v. Pattison
  144 So. 2d 66· Fla. 3d DCA· 1962-07-24 ·cited 4×
  A Florida appellate court reviewed a trial court's decision to set aside a default judgment against a co-owner defendant in a negligence action. The court held that the defendant's assertion that he assumed his co-defendant had filed an answer did not constitute excusable neglect
• Kathe v. United States
  284 F.2d 713· 9th Cir.· 1960-12-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the appellant's motion to vacate the prior judgment as it was untimely filed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b).
• Lewis v. United States
  278 F.2d 33· D.C. Cir.· 1960-04-14 ·cited 4×
  Appeals from judgments of conviction filed nearly a year after the right of appeal accrued must be dismissed, even if excusable neglect is found for the late filing.
• Hinson v. Mich. Mut. Liab. Co.
  275 F.2d 537· 5th Cir.· 1960-03-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant waived its right to seek dismissal by unilaterally rescheduling the plaintiff's physical examination, and the plaintiff's failure to appear was potentially excusable due to illness.
• Padgett v. United States
  272 F.2d 774· 5th Cir.· 1959-12-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion for relief under Rule 60(b)(6) because the appellant made a considered choice to discontinue litigation.
• Semel v. United States
  158 F.2d 231· 5th Cir.· 1946-11-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the movants' notice of appeal was ineffective because it was not taken from a final decision and the time for filing the record had expired without good cause.
• Kummer v. United States
  148 F.2d 191· 6th Cir.· 1945-03-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the orders allowing a party to be joined and setting aside a default were procedural and not final decisions, thus not immediately appealable.
• Welly Juhl v. Juhl
  328 So. 3d 1031· Fla. 2d DCA· 2021-08-13 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's denial of attorney's fees in a divorce case. The trial court mistakenly believed a rule of civil procedure barred its jurisdiction to consider the motion, but the appellate court clarified that this rule does not apply to family law ca
• Howard v. Gualt
  259 So. 3d 119· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-10-31 ·cited 3×
  A guarantor appeals a trial court's denial of his motion to vacate a default judgment in a mortgage foreclosure action. The guarantor argues the plaintiff failed to exercise due diligence in attempting personal service before resorting to service by publication. The appellate cou
• Pipeline Constructors, Inc. v. The Transition House, Inc.
  257 So. 3d 606· Fla. 1st DCA· 2018-10-18 ·cited 3×
  A trial court may not dismiss an action for failure to appear at a case management conference scheduled in violation of rule 1.200(a), and where a party establishes excusable neglect through uncontroverted affidavits, relief from dismissal under rule 1.540(b) must be granted.
• Eulogio Lisca v. Fla. Atl. Constr., Inc.
  219 So. 3d 872· Fla. 4th DCA· 2017-05-31 ·cited 3×
  Eulogio Lisca appealed a default judgment entered against him for failing to file an answer to a counterclaim for declaratory relief filed by his employer's general contractor. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the default, holding that the trial court did not abuse it
• Fields v. Beneficial Fla., Inc.
  208 So. 3d 278· Fla. 5th DCA· 2016-12-16 ·cited 3×
  Timothy Fields appeals a trial court's order vacating an involuntary dismissal in a mortgage foreclosure action brought by Beneficial Florida, Inc. The court affirmed, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting Beneficial's motion to vacate the dismissa
• Mitchell v. Northstar Panama City Beach, Inc.
  171 So. 3d 833· Fla. 1st DCA· 2015-08-24 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of a motion to set aside a default judgment based on lack of proper service and failure to show excusable neglect, but reversed and remanded the award of unliquidated damages because a defaulting defendant has a due process ri
• K.H. v. The Child's. Home Soc'y OF Fla.
  120 So. 3d 104· Fla. 4th DCA· 2013-08-14 ·cited 3×
  A putative father challenges the termination of his parental rights in an adoption proceeding, arguing the trial court erred by failing to appoint counsel before the statutory 30-day compliance period expired and by entering a default judgment without notice. The court affirms, h
• Beloni Petit-Frere v. State
  108 So. 3d 681· Fla. 2d DCA· 2013-02-15 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court affirmed in part and reversed in part an order denying a motion for postconviction relief, specifically addressing claims of ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel.
• Wolff v. Piwko
  104 So. 3d 372· Fla. 3d DCA· 2012-11-28 ·cited 3×
  A party's failure to provide an updated address and demonstrate excusable neglect, a meritorious defense, and due diligence prevents vacating a default judgment, even if the party claims non-receipt of pleadings.
• Filarski v. Reemployment Assistance Appeals Comm'n
  97 So. 3d 278· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-09-12 ·cited 3×
  Jean Filarski appealed the Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission's denial of her motion to vacate and re-enter a final order so she could file a timely appeal. The court affirmed the denial, holding that an administrative agency may only vacate its final orders where it has
• J.J.K. Int'l, Inc. v. Deoanand Shivbaran and Nurelene Shhadat
  985 So. 2d 66· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-06-25 ·cited 3×
  J.J.K. International appealed the trial court's dismissal of its complaint with prejudice against Shivbaran and Shhadat for violating deed restrictions on property resale. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court abused its discretion in denying J.J.K.'s motion
• H & F Tires, L.P. v. D. Gladis Co., Inc.
  981 So. 2d 647· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-05-21 ·cited 3×
  H & F Tires appeals a trial court order denying its motion to vacate a default judgment entered due to improper service of process. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, finding that service on a tire store manager was improper under Florida's service of process statutes
• Armstrong v. Cadle Co.
  192 F.R.D. 698· S.D. Fla.· 2007-01-18 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that the plaintiff committed perjury or other misconduct that prevented the defendant from fully and fairly presenting its case.
• Carnero v. Nat'l Home Mortg. Corp.
  941 So. 2d 395· Fla. 3d DCA· 2006-06-21 ·cited 3×
  Juana Carnero appealed the dismissal of her declaratory complaint challenging her stepson Ricardo Carnero's ownership of the family home, claiming her incapacitated husband retained legal title despite quit claim deeds. The court reversed and reinstated summary judgment in Ricard
• Pixton v. Williams Scotsman, Inc.
  924 So. 2d 37· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-01-27 ·cited 3×
  The Pixtons appealed the trial court's dismissal of their negligence action against Williams Scotsman for failure to timely serve process within 120 days. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court failed to properly apply the Kozel factors and conduct an evidenti
• NET ONE, LLC v. Christian Telecom Network, LLC
  901 So. 2d 417· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-05-20 ·cited 3×
  Net One appealed an order vacating a default judgment against Christian Telecom Network for non-payment of invoices under a Switchless Reseller Agreement. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded, finding that while Christian established excusable neglect and due
• Dawkins, Inc. v. Huff
  836 So. 2d 1062· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-01-31 ·cited 3×
  The court held that orders denying motions to set aside clerk's defaults are not appealable non-final orders, and thus, the appeal must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. However, the court noted that trial courts retain jurisdiction to revisit such interlocutory orders befor
• United States v. McCorkle
  143 F. Supp. 2d 1311· M.D. Fla.· 2001-01-11 ·cited 3×
  The court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation to deny third-party claims from Charter Pacific Bank and United Parcel Service, while granting C.V. Butler Farms, Inc.'s petition, amending the forfeiture order accordingly.
• Debello v. Faske
  668 So. 2d 324· Fla. 3d DCA· 1996-02-21 ·cited 3×
  A defendant's Rule 1.540 motion for relief from a money judgment entered in his absence was granted because his failure to appear resulted from excusable neglect due to miscommunication about the trial date, and the trial court erred in defaulting him despite his answer.
• Fla. Specialized Carriers, Inc. v. Tierra Constr. Co., Inc.
  632 So. 2d 282· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-02-25 ·cited 3×
• Diaz v. Bushong
  619 So. 2d 1020· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-06-01 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion for an extension of time and granting motions for involuntary dismissal due to the plaintiff's failure to comply with a court order.
• Walker v. Nolke
  614 So. 2d 655· Fla. 5th DCA· 1993-02-26 ·cited 3×
  The court held that dismissing the civil action with prejudice was an abuse of discretion because the amended complaint was timely filed in the circuit court, and the only error was a scrivener's error with the case number, which was also made by the opposing party and the judge.
• United States v. Roberts
  978 F.2d 17· 1st Cir.· 1992-10-26 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by suppressing evidence solely due to the government's untimely filing, where the delay was brief, resulted from rule ambiguity, and caused no prejudice.
• Baker v. Baker
  538 So. 2d 74· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-02-01 ·cited 3×
  The court held that denying the appellant's motion for rehearing constituted an abuse of discretion, as her failure to appear was due to excusable neglect.
• Araujo-Sanchez v. Amoon
  513 So. 2d 1307· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-09-22 ·cited 3×
  Plaintiff Araujo-Sanchez appealed the dismissal of his third amended complaint for being fourteen days late. The appellate court reversed, holding that counsel's miscalendaring constituted excusable neglect and that dismissal was an abuse of discretion where defendants suffered n
• Arranco Shoes BY Carmen, Inc. v. Calzados Milady
  422 So. 2d 341· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-11-09 ·cited 3×
• The Vanguard Grp., Inc. v. Vanguard Sec., Inc.
  409 So. 2d 1219· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-02-23 ·cited 3×
• In re Rules of Summary Procedure
  270 So. 2d 729· Fla.· 1972-12-13 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Supreme Court adopted a complete revision of the Rules of Summary Procedure applicable to civil actions in county courts with claims not exceeding $1,500. The revision simplified procedures for small claims litigation while incorporating relevant provisions of the Flo
• Anderson v. Yungkau
  153 F.2d 685· 6th Cir.· 1946-01-28 ·cited 3×
  The dissenting judge believes the court should have reversed and remanded for consideration of the plaintiff's suit on its merits.
• Story v. Heartland Payment Sys., LLC
  2024 WL 3708037· M.D. Fla.· 2025-05-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a defendant's motion to seal portions of a class action settlement motion was untimely and lacked good cause, denying the motion.
• Mirna J. DeBlois v. Dominguez
  390 So. 3d 51· Fla. 3d DCA· 2023-09-13 ·cited 2×
  A non-final order granting a late-filed motion to substitute a deceased party's personal representatives is not reviewable under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)i because the order does not determine personal jurisdiction over the substituted parties. However, s
• The Est. of Deborah Ann Wright v. Mina
  2016 WL 7177621· M.D. Fla.· 2023-05-23 ·cited 2×
  The Court granted the unopposed motion for substitution of parties because there was a sufficient showing of excusable neglect for the delay.
• FI Cap. Inv. 19, LLC v. Optimal Health Pharmacy, LLC
  321 So. 3d 278· Fla. 4th DCA· 2023-01-04 ·cited 2×
  The appellate court affirmed a lower court's decision to vacate a default judgment against an escrow agent. The court clarified that while trial courts should make findings when vacating defaults, it is not a mandatory requirement for reversal.
• Schenavar v. Schenavar
  350 So. 3d 439· Fla. 4th DCA· 2022-11-09 ·cited 2×
• Locke v. Whitehead
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2021-06-23 ·cited 2×
  A contractor appeals an order vacating a default judgment against homeowners who filed an erroneous construction lien against his homestead property. The trial court vacated the judgment, finding the homeowners satisfied the requirements for relief from default. The appellate cou