From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hirsch v. Muldowney

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jun 4, 1985
470 So. 2d 766 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

Opinion

No. 84-2303.

June 4, 1985.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, James C. Henderson, J.

Thornton Herndon and John Edward, Miami, for appellant.

John Muldowney, Miami, for appellee.

Before NESBITT, DANIEL S. PEARSON and FERGUSON, JJ.


The trial court should have granted defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution where (1) the last record activity prior to the filing of that motion was an order continuing trial filed more than one year before, and (2) plaintiff did not show good cause in writing, at least five days before the hearing on the motion, why the action should remain pending. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.420(e); Govayra v. Straubel, 466 So.2d 1065 (Fla. 1985). Further, it was plaintiff's burden, not the court's, to renotice the case for trial since it was the plaintiff who requested the continuance due to withdrawal of counsel. See Govayra; Bogart v. F.B. Condominiums, Inc., 438 So.2d 856 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), rev. denied, 449 So.2d 264 (Fla. 1984).

Reversed.


Summaries of

Hirsch v. Muldowney

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jun 4, 1985
470 So. 2d 766 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)
Case details for

Hirsch v. Muldowney

Case Details

Full title:NATHAN B. HIRSCH, M.D., APPELLANT, v. YOUNG H. MULDOWNEY, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Jun 4, 1985

Citations

470 So. 2d 766 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

Citing Cases

Southwinds Riding Acd. v. Schneider

Accordingly, the appellees' motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is See, e.g., Greyhound Corp. v.…

Neace v. Neace

A properly noticed party to a trial has a duty to exercise reasonable diligence to inform himself of the…