Cole v. Glynn
Decision Date | 22 April 1981 |
Docket Number | No. 80-316,80-316 |
Citation | 397 So.2d 996 |
Parties | William J. COLE and Teri Cole, his wife, Appellants/Cross Appellees, v. Michael James GLYNN and Eileen Glynn, his wife, and Paul D. Jagers, Jr., and Mary Ellen Jagers, his wife, Appellees/Cross Appellants. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Stephen G. Melcer of Hamilton, James, Merkle & Young, Delray Beach, for appellants/cross appellees.
Thomas R. Tatum and James P. Murphy of Buck & Tatum, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellees/cross appellants.
We affirm the action of the trial judge in permitting the intervention of the Jagers, appellees, and in vacating the default judgment. We believe the trial court was entitled to conclude that the Jagers had demonstrated sufficient equities or other special reasons to justify their participation in the proceedings. See Intermediary Finance Corp. v. McKay, 93 Fla. 101, 111 So. 531 (Fla.1927); Doyle v. Tutan, 110 So.2d 42 (Fla.3d DCA 1959).
We also find no abuse of discretion by the trial court in leaving the appellants in temporary possession of the property in question. This affirmance should not be construed as any indication by this court concerning the merits of the issues which now remain for the trial court to resolve.
To continue reading
Request your trial- State v. Sykes
-
O'Connell v. Rabin, 91-505
...equities or other special reasons to justify their participation in the proceedings, intervention should be permitted. Cole v. Glynn, 397 So.2d 996 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); see also Wags Transportation System v. City of Miami Beach, 88 So.2d 751 The facts of this case, at this posture, dictate ......