Legal Opinion · Concurrence

M.W. v. SPCP Group V, LLC

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 4, 2015No. 14-0832Published

1Concurrence

EMAS, J.,

specially concurring.

I concur in the result because I believe it to be dictated by this court’s prior decision in Apple Premium Finance Serv. Co. v. Teachers Ins. & Annuity Ass’n of Am., 727 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). Were we writing on a clean slate however, it might well be appropriate to consider whether the notice requirement of - rule 1.500(b) is properly triggered by a single pre-suit letter sent five' months before the commencement of the action.

The plain language of rule 1.500(a) and (b) provides that a party may seek a clerk’s default unless the party against whom…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Gulf Maintenance & Supply, Inc. v. Barnett Bank of TallahasseeDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
  2. Reicheinbach v. Southeast Bank, NADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
  3. Ole, Inc. v. YarivDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990
  4. Jar, Inc. v. Universal American RealtyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1986
  5. EGF Tampa Associates v. BohlenDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1988

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API