Sklar v. Brawley, 651 So. 2d 1314 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995).
Search
Sklar v. Brawley, 651 So. 2d 1314 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995). Book View Copy Cite
Sklar
v.
Brawley
94-640.
District Court of Appeal of Florida.
Mar 22, 1995.
651 So. 2d 1314
Schwartz, C.J., and Barkdull and Baskin.
Cited by 5 opinions  |  Published

Popper & Popper and Victor K. Rones, for appellant.

Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, Stanley B. Price and Eileen Ball Mahta, for appellee.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BARKDULL and BASKIN, JJ.

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

Because the plaintiff improperly took a default without notice after communicating with opposing counsel, who clearly indicated his intention to defend on the merits, see Ole, Inc. v. Yariv, 566 So.2d 812 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Gulf Maintenance & Supply, Inc. v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 543 So.2d 813 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), the default should have been set aside whether or not the answer raised a meritorious defense. Cardet v. Resolution Trust Corp., 563 So.2d 167, 169 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); J.A.R., Inc. v. Universal Am. [*1315] Realty Corp., 485 So.2d 467 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Chester, Blackburn & Roder, Inc. v. Marchese, 383 So.2d 734, 735 n. 3 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).[1]

Reversed.

1 For this reason we express no view as to whether a "meritorious defense" was in fact presented.