Gomez v. Pujols, 89-322
| Citation | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1270,546 So.2d 734 |
| Decision Date | 23 May 1989 |
| Docket Number | No. 89-322,89-322 |
| Parties | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1270 R. Cristiana GOMEZ, Appellant, v. Jose R. PUJOLS, as Trustee, Appellee. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
Daniel P. Tunick, Miami, for appellant.
Robert J. Lewison, Miami, for appellee.
Before NESBITT, JORGENSON, and COPE, JJ.
Cristiana Gomez appeals from a default judgment entered for her failure to comply with an order compelling her to answer interrogatories in a mortgage foreclosure. We affirm.
On June 3, 1988, Jose Pujols filed his complaint for foreclosure against Cristiana Gomez. Gomez answered on June 16, 1988, and raised various affirmative defenses. She alleged, inter alia, that Pujols was estopped from foreclosure because he had accepted payments due and that the mortgage "had been very recently brought current after payment of a heavy premium." On June 29, 1988, Pujols propounded interrogatories to Gomez. On September 22, 1988, Pujols moved to compel Gomez to answer those interrogatories. On October 11, 1988, the trial court ordered Gomez to answer the interrogatories by November 26, 1988. Despite this record activity and repeated requests by letter, telephone, and telegram from Pujols's lawyer to Gomez's lawyer, no answers were served. On December 14, 1988, Pujols moved to strike Gomez's answer and also moved for entry of a default on the grounds that Gomez had failed to answer the interrogatories. The trial court granted the motion on January 12, 1989. In its order, the trial court specifically found that, despite its order that Gomez answer the interrogatories and despite "additional opportunities" provided to Gomez to answer, Gomez failed to cooperate. Gomez's counsel moved to withdraw on January 10, 1989, citing his client's failure to cooperate. The trial court authorized Gomez's counsel to withdraw; however, he re-entered his appearance on February 8, 1989.
Pujols moved for summary judgment on January 18, 1989, and set the hearing for January 24. Trial on the foreclosure suit had been scheduled for the week of February 27, 1989. The trial court did not hear argument on the motion for summary judgment and stayed all proceedings pending this appeal. At oral argument before this court, counsel represented that Gomez still had not answered the interrogatories propounded on June 29, 1988.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in entering a default in this action. A trial court may enter a default as a sanction against a party who has failed to comply with a discovery...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kranz v. Levan, 91-558
...944, 946 (Fla.1983); Delta Info. Serv., Inc. v. Joseph R. Jannach, M.D. & Assoc., 569 So.2d 1353 (Fla.3d DCA 1990); Gomez v. Pujols, 546 So.2d 734 (Fla.3d DCA 1989); Dominguez v. Wolfe, 524 So.2d 1101 (Fla.3d DCA 1988); F. Food Co. v. Hart Properties, Inc., 515 So.2d 279 (Fla.3d DCA 1987), ......
-
Diaz v. Bushong
...court's decision will not be disturbed unless there is a showing of abuse of discretion. Clay, 546 So.2d at 435 (citing Gomez v. Pujols, 546 So.2d 734 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)). "If reasonable [persons] could differ as to the propriety of the action taken by the trial court, then the action is no......
-
Delta Information Services, Inc. v. Joseph R. Jannach, M.D. & Associates
...why it did not respond to discovery over a period of two and a half years, contrary to five orders requiring such. See Gomez v. Pujols, 546 So.2d 734 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Georges v. Insurance Technicians, Inc., 448 So.2d 1185 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), and Akers v. Corbett, 138 Fla. 730, 190 So. 2......
-
Satellite City, Inc. v. Sancetta, 94-2420
...GERSTEN and GODERICH, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.380(b); Mercer v. Raine, 443 So.2d 944 (Fla.1983); Gomez v. Pujols, 546 So.2d 734 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Watson v. Peskoe, 407 So.2d 954 (Fla. 3d DCA ...