GRAPIN & CHAYKIN, M.D., P.A., AND BERTRAM GRAPIN AND LOUIS CHAYKIN, INDIVIDUALLY, APPELLANTS,
v.
TURNOFF & FOX, M.D., P.A., A FLORIDA PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION, AND HOWARD TURNOFF AND STEVEN FOX, INDIVIDUALLY, APPELLEES
GRAPIN & CHAYKIN, M.D., P.A., AND BERTRAM GRAPIN AND LOUIS CHAYKIN, INDIVIDUALLY, APPELLANTS,
TURNOFF & FOX, M.D., P.A., A FLORIDA PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION, AND HOWARD TURNOFF AND STEVEN FOX, INDIVIDUALLY, APPELLEES
413 So. 2d 133
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1982)
Negative Treatment
Cited by 12 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The trial court order adjudging plaintiffs in contempt of court and ordering them to pay to the defendants the sum of $250 per day for each and every day they remained in violation of orders requiring them to make discovery, is void for the failure of the order to contain findings that the alleged contemnors had the present ability to comply with the underlying discovery orders. Garo v. Garo, 347 So. 2d 418 (Fla.1977); Epstein v. Epstein, 345 So. 2d 398 (Fla.3d DCA 1977).
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dep't OF Child. & Families v. R.H., 819 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…3); Florida Coast Bank of Pompano Beach v. Mayes, 433 So. 2d 1033, 1036 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983) ("[T]rial courts should make an express finding of ability to comply before imposing sanctions.”); Grapin & Chaykin, M.D., P.A. v. Turnoff & Fox, M.D., P.A., 413 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (holding contempt order is void because it did not contain findings that the alleged contemnors had the present ability to comply with the underlying order); see also § 38.23, Florida Statutes (2001) ("A refusal to obey any legal…
-
Channel Components, Inc. v. Am. II Elecs., Inc., 915 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)…order); Baliton, [*1285] 436 So. 2d 1110 (reversing imposition of $150,000 fíne for discovery violations because there was no finding of contempt and fine was otherwise punitive in nature); Grapin & Chaykin, M.D., P.A. v. Turnoff & Fox, M.D., P.A., 413 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (reversing order adjudging plaintiffs in contempt and imposing $250-per-day fine for each day they remained in violation of orders requiring discovery because the order did not contain findings the plaintiffs had the ability to co…
-
Grapin & Chaykin, M.D., P.A. v. Turnoff & FOX, M.D., P.A., 416 So. 2d 843 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…. Appellants urge, inter alia, that our opinion affirming the order of the trial court which imposed discovery sanctions should be vacated on the ground that our holding is in conflict with this court’s decision in Grapin & Chaykin v. Turnoff & Fox, 413 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), in which a different panel held: The trial court order adjudging plaintiffs in contempt of court and ordering them to pay to the defendants the sum of $250 per day for each and every day they remained in violation of orders req…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Garo v. Garo, 347 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 1977)
- Kelson Deanzel McKINNEY v. State, 345 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)