Emmer v. Brucato
Florida District Court of Appeal
813 So. 2d 264 (2002)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Charles and Marcia Brucato (defendants) filed an action against Allan Emmer, a Michigan resident, in Seminole County, Florida. The Brucatos submitted a return-of-service stating that Emmer was validly and timely served at his Michigan residence on October 26, 2000. Emmer did not respond to the Brucatos’ summons. In late December 2000, the Brucatos moved for entry of a default-judgment. After receiving notice of the Brucatos motion, Emmer requested a copy of the summons, which the Brucatos’ attorney promptly sent; however, Emmer claimed he never received it. On January 16, 2001, after receiving no response from Emmer, the trial court entered a final default-judgment in the Brucatos’ favor. Weeks later, Emmer moved to vacate the default-judgment, arguing that (1) Emmer’s failure to answer the Brucatos’ complaint was due to excusable neglect; (2) Emmer had a meritorious defense to the Brucatos’ action; and (3) the Florida court lacked personal jurisdiction over Emmer because Emmer had never been served with process. The trial court denied Emmer’s motion. Emmer appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Orfinger, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
