PROFESSIONAL ASPHALT LLC v. THE NORTH GROVES CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION INC (2023)

AFFIRMED. See Kozel v. Ostendorf, 629 So. 2d 817, 818 (Fla. 1993) (reasoning that lesser sanction may often be appropriate to impose when attorney, not client, is responsible for error); Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Sandhill, 202 So. 3d 944, 945 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (stating that in order to preserve trial court error in Kozel context, appellant needed to raise absence of trial court analysis in motion for rehearing); see also Bowman v. Kingsland Dev., Inc., 432 So. 2d 660, 662 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983) (“A default also admits the plaintiff's entitlement to liquidated damages due under the pleaded cause of action, but not unliquidated damages.”); Lloyd S. Meisels, P.A. v. Dobrofsky, 341 So. 3d 1131, 1136 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (“Because the defendants failed to file a response with their supporting factual position, as required under the amended rule, the trial court was permitted to consider the facts set forth in the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment as ‘undisputed for purposes of the motion.’ ” (citing Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510(e)(2))).¹

FOOTNOTES

1.   This case was transferred from the Second District Court of Appeal to this Court on January 1, 2023.

PER CURIAM.

TRAVER, C.J., and STARGEL and WHITE, JJ., concur.