MIRIAM DONNER, APPELLANT,
v.
VERNON HETHERINGTON ET AL., APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A dismissal with prejudice is not justified by disruptive behavior alone without willful disobedience of a court order.
The plaintiff's case was dismissed with prejudice mid-trial due to disruptive behavior. The plaintiff represented herself pro se.…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Willful Violation Of Court Order cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Judge.
In the middle of a jury trial,1 the court dismissed the plaintiff’s case with prejudice on the apparent ground that she had been guilty of disruptive behavior during the proceedings. We appreciate the real problems encountered below by the trial judge in his attempts to deal with a difficult litigant who also sought to represent herself pro se. There is simply nothing in the record, however, which demonstrates that the plaintiff disobeyed — willfully or otherwise — an order of court or committed any other act which would justify a dismissal of the action, either with or without prejudice.2 Reliance Builders of Coral Springs, Inc. v. City of Coral Springs, 373 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); Beaver Crane Service, Inc. v. National Surety Corp., 373 So. 2d 88 (Fla.3d DCA 1979), and cases cited; Francois v. Harris, 366 So. 2d 851 (Fla.3d DCA 1979), and cases cited. The judgment under review is therefore reversed and the cause remanded for trial.3
Reversed and remanded.
. The facts involved in the action are briefly described in Donner v. Hetherington, 370 So. 2d 1225 (Fla.3d DCA 1979), in which we reversed a summary judgment which had been granted to one of the many parties defendant. The trial which is involved in the case now before us was conducted against the remaining defendants while the prior appeal was pending.
. We find no authority for the trial judge’s requirement that the plaintiff secure the permission of the Administrative Judge before filing any subsequent proceeding in the 11th Judicial Circuit without counsel. That portion of the order is therefore likewise vacated.
.As in Donner v. Hetherington, supra, at 370 So. 2d 1226, n. 1, we find no error in the trial judge’s denial of the plaintiffs motions for summary judgment as to the liability of these appellees.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Donner v. Hetherington, 399 So. 2d 1011 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…SCHWARTZ, Judge. For the third time, Ms. Donner appeals from an adverse judgment in her false imprisonment action. For the third time, we reverse. At the retrial required by Donner v. Hetherington, 376 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979),1 the trial judge directed a verdict at the conclusion of the plaintiff’s case in favor of the defendant Hethering-ton, the Miami police officer who originally took Donner into custody, as well as the city itself, and their insura…
-
Donner v. Appalachian Ins. Co., 580 So. 2d 797 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)…96 Fla. 756, 759, 119 So. 131, 132 (1928). We trust that trial of this cause will occur before this litigation assumes such Dickensian proportions. Affirmed. . See Donner v. Hetherington, 399 So. 2d 1011 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Donner v. Hetherington, 376 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Donner v. Hetherington, 370 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). . See Edelstein v. Donner, 450 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), approved, 471 So. 2d 26 (Fla.1985); Donner v. Edelstein, 425 So. 2d 1220 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Donner v. Ede…
-
Kleinschmidt v. Gator Off. Supply & Furniture, Inc., 551 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…comply with these orders, and, accordingly, a dismissal of the action was plainly an inappropriate remedy. See Muhtar v. Aetna Ins. Co., 456 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Davis v. Freeman, 405 So. 2d 241 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Donner v. Hetherington, 376 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). As to the failure to comply with the interrogatory and discovery production order, the plaintiff was given but one opportunity to comply with this order prior to the dismissal order and, accordingly, a dismissal of the action was…
Authorities Cited
- Cummings v. S.C. Ins. Co., 373 So. 2d 88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Ostene Francois v. Harris, 366 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Donner v. Hetherington, 370 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Reliance Builders OF Coral Springs, Inc. v. The City OF Coral Springs, 373 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)