Legal Opinion

Osheroff v. Osheroff

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided June 4, 1997No. 96-3535PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

We reverse the order entering default and default judgment against the defendant-appellant as a sanction because counsel filed a motion to dismiss instead of an answer pursuant to an agreed order requiring the filing of a “responsive pleading.” See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.100(a) (defining “pleadings”). “This was much too harsh a sanction for the minor dereliction involved and thus constituted a plain abuse of discretion.” Techno Indus. Corp. v. Cooper Indus., Inc., 410 So.2d 584, 584 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (citations omitted); see also Joseph v. Marese, 534 So.2d 920, 921 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Thaw,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Techno Indus. Corp. v. Cooper Indus., Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982
  2. Joseph v. MareseDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1988
  3. Thaw, Gopman & Associates, P.A. v. Jack J. Greenberg, M.D. & Associates, P.A.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Leath v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997
  2. Pierce v. KrohaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2016
  3. Mtw Jordan Inc., Jordan Ave. Management, Inc., Markee White and v. Tnt Educators, Inc. D/B/A Apple Academy, Tanya Baskerville & Waltrell LeeDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2025

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API