PAN AMERICAN BANK, N.A., APPELLANT,
v.
WORLD PURCHASING, INC., APPELLEE
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.
It is an abuse of discretion to vacate an order of dismissal for failure to prosecute when no action has been taken for a year.
The trial court dismissed World Purchasing's complaint for failure to prosecute. Twelve days later, the court entered a non-final order reinstating th…
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 Failure To Prosecute cases and more on FLexlaw
FERGUSON, Judge.
Twelve days after dismissing World Purchasing’s complaint for failure to prosecute, the trial court entered a non-final order reinstating the action. Pan American appeals from that non-final order entered after the final order of dismissal. We exercise jurisdiction pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(4).1
Where no action is taken by the filing of pleadings, by order of the court or otherwise for a period of a year, it is an abuse of discretion to deny a defendant’s motion to dismiss, pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.420(e), for failure to prosecute. Industrial Trucks of Florida, Inc. v. Gonzalez, 351 So. 2d 744 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). An order which vacates an order of dismissal for failure to prosecute is subject to the same test for abuse of discretion. The fact that the statute of limitations has run is a not good cause for vacating the order of dismissal. See Dade County v. Moreno, 227 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969).
Reversed.
. Cf. Southwinds Riding Academy v. Schneider, 507 So. 2d 782 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) (an order denying a motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute is a non-final nonappealable order).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Marsh & McLennan, Inc. v. Aerolineas Nacionales del Ecuador, 530 So. 2d 971 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…ponded that their appeals are from a non-final order entered after a final order and are thus authorized by Flor [*972] ida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(4). Although aware that this court in Pan American Bank, N.A. v. World Purchasing, Inc., 507 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), held an identical order to be appeal-able, the panel assigned to hear this case1 was of the view that the order sought to be reviewed was not appealable. On motion of the panel, this nascent conflict was brought to the attention…1 / 4
-
Morris Canning Corp. & Crump Special Servs. v. Blanchard, 528 So. 2d 493 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…there are a number of cases holding that the running of the statute of limitations does not constitute good cause why an action should remain pending under Rule 1.420(e), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Pan American Bank v. World Purchasing, Inc., 507 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); FMC Corporation v. Chatman, 368 So. 2d 1307 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); Dade County v. Moreno, 227 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969). Rule 1.420(e), similarly to Rule 4.110(b), provides that any action in which there has been no record acti…
-
Sylvita Pierre-Paul v. Checo, 583 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Pan American Bank v. World Purchasing, Inc., 507 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Paedae v. Voltaggio, 472 So. 2d 768 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Brannon, 351 So. 2d 744 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- Aurora Pacheco and Ubaldo Pacheco v. Ramos, 351 So. 2d 744 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- City OF Madeira Beach v. Hogan, 227 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969)
- Shepard Broad v. Bertoglio, 507 So. 2d 782 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
- Southwinds Riding Acad. & Wynell Sebree v. Schneider, 507 So. 2d 782 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)