From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fusilier v. Markov

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jul 10, 1996
676 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Opinion

No. 95-3603.

July 10, 1996.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Jon I. Gordon, J.

William R. Black, Pompano Beach, for appellant.

Gregory P. Markov, in proper person.

Before BARKDULL, LEVY, and GREEN, JJ.


Connie J. Fusilier (hereinafter "Fusilier"), the defendant below, appeals a trial court order denying a motion to vacate default and default final judgment. For the following reasons, we reverse.

On March 10, 1995, the plaintiff, Gregory P. Markov (hereinafter "Markov") filed his complaint naming Fusilier and two other individuals as co-defendants. Fusilier and one of the co-defendants filed their respective answers, but each failed to attach the required certificate of service. The remaining co-defendant, however, filed his answer with the required certificate of service. On June 16, 1995, the plaintiff served upon the defendants his first amended complaint. However, the plaintiff failed to obtain leave of the court or consent of the parties before he served his amended complaint.

Fusilier maintains that since Markov did not obtain leave of the court or consent of the parties before he amended his complaint, his first amended complaint is a nullity to which no responsive pleading is due. We agree. A party may amend a pleading once, as a matter of course, at any time before a responsive pleading is served. Otherwise, a party may amend a pleading only by leave of court or by the consent of the parties. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.190 (a). In the instant case, in addition to the answers filed by Fusilier and one other defendant, one of Fusilier's co-defendants properly served his answer with an accompanying certificate of service on the plaintiff on June 5, 1995. The plaintiff served his first amended complaint on the defendants on June 16, 1995. Accordingly, we reverse and remand this case to the trial court with instructions to dismiss the amended complaint and vacate the default final judgment. Warner-Lambert Co. v. Patrick, 428 So.2d 718 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). The opinion of this court should not be construed in any way to suggest that the plaintiff should not be allowed to amend his complaint once he has sought leave from the court or consent from the parties, in accordance with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.190 (a).

Reversed and remanded.


Summaries of

Fusilier v. Markov

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jul 10, 1996
676 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)
Case details for

Fusilier v. Markov

Case Details

Full title:CONNIE J. FUSILIER, APPELLANT, v. GREGORY P. MARKOV, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Jul 10, 1996

Citations

676 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Citing Cases

Starvest U.S., Inc. v. Polfer

Here, Polfer failed to obtain leave of court. He also brought an action by motion which he should have…

Merrick Park, LLC v. Garcia

Thus, the trial court did not err in concluding that Count II of the Initial Counterclaim was a legal…