MARY FIELDS, ETC., APPELLANT,

v.

FLORIDA FARM BUREAU CASUALTY INSURANCE CO., ETC., ET AL., APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• E.F. Hutton v. Sussman, 504 So. 2d 1372 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
  …e the judgment after the jury had already determined Sussman’s comparative negligence, and does not represent an affirmative judicial decision, the trial court should have granted Hutton’s Rule 1.540(b) motion. See, e.g., Dixie Ins. Co. v. Federick, 449 So. 2d 972 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) (where terms of insurance policy limited insurer’s liability to less than the amount entered in a judgment against insurer, insurer was entitled to relief from judgment pursuant to Rule 1.540(b)); Stella, 281 So. 2d at 585-86 (sa…
• Glassalum Eng'g Corp. v. 392208 Ontario Ltd., 487 So. 2d 87 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
  …fore the filing of a motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute constitutes sufficient record activity to preclude dismissal, Rivera v. A.M.I.F., Inc., 417 So. 2d 304 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); see also Fields v. Florida Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co., 449 So. 2d 972 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), and because, with the advent of the 1977 amendment to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.420(e), a trial court no longer has “inherent power to dismiss a cause for failure to prosecute where there is activity of record within one…
• Sottile v. Sottile, 551 So. 2d 608 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
  …Sussman’s comparative negligence, and does not represent an affirmative judicial decision, the trial court should have granted Hutton’s rule 1.540(b) motion, [footnote omitted]. 504 So. 2d at 1373-1374. See also Dixie Insurance Company v. Federick, 449 So. 2d 972 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) (rule 1.540(b) is the remedy to correct a mistake or inadvertence contained in an original judgment). Here Jennifer properly sought relief in the trial court by filing a rule 1.540 motion. Although it is clear that relief was no…

Authorities Cited

• Cocolla v. Carmelina Cocolla, 417 So. 2d 304 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
• Rivera v. A. M. I. F., Inc., 417 So. 2d 304 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)