Techno Indus. Corp. v. Cooper Indus., Inc.

410 So.2d 584 (1982)

TECHNO INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION, Gil Lozano and Leonor Arango, Appellants,
v.
COOPER INDUSTRIES, INC., d/b/A Cooper Airmotive, Appellee.

No. 81-278.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

February 23, 1982. Rehearing Denied March 23, 1982.

McCormick, Bedford & Backmeyer and Gerald L. Bedford, Leonardo P. Mendez, Miami, for appellants.

High, Stack, Lazenby, Bender, Palahach & Lacasa and R. Scott Boundy, Coral Gables, for appellee.

Before HENDRY, SCHWARTZ and BASKIN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The trial judge struck the defendants' pleadings and entered a default judgment against them because counsel filed a second motion to dismiss eleven days, rather than an answer ten days subsequent to an agreed order which so required.^[1] This was much too harsh a sanction for the minor dereliction involved and thus constituted a plain abuse of discretion. Maqueira v. Almas, 409 So.2d 199 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Beaver Crane Service, Inc. v. National Surety Corp., 373 So.2d 88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). Accordingly, the judgment under review is

Reversed.

NOTES

[1] An answer was in fact filed, after the default had been entered, twelve days after the agreed order.