CIGNA, ETC., APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STORAGE SYSTEMS, INC., ETC., 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.
CIGNA, as co-plaintiff in an action against Adolf Construction Company, voluntarily dismissed its claim the day before trial. The trial court ordered CIGNA to pay $100,000 in settlement proceeds (held by CIGNA's attorney) to the other co-plaintiffs. The appellate court reversed, holding that CIGNA had the legal right to dismiss voluntarily under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.420(a) because no property was seized or in the court's custody and no cross-claims or counterclaims were pending against CIGNA.
No. CIGNA had the legal right to voluntarily dismiss its claim under Rule 1.420(a) because the exception to voluntary dismissal—when property has been seized or is in the court's custody—did not apply. The trial court lacked jurisdiction to order CIGNA to pay the settlement proceeds to the other parties.
[1] A plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss an action without court order before trial, unless property has been seized or is in the custody of the court.
[2] A voluntary dismissal by a plaintiff is not barred by the existence of settlement proceeds held in the plaintiff's possession.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Except in actions in which property has been seized or is in the custody of the court, an action may be dismissed by plaintiff without order of court”
Statement of the rule permitting voluntary dismissal, which is the governing legal standard
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCIGNA was a co-plaintiff with United Storage Systems and Clausson Lexow in an action against Adolf Construction Company. Adolf's insurance carrier, US…
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 Settlement Proceeds cases and more on FLexlaw
COBB, Judge.
The issue in this case is jurisdiction. The appellant, Cigna, a corporation d/b/a Insurance Company of North America, was a co-plaintiff with United Storage Systems, Inc. and Clausson Lexow, appellees herein, in an action against Adolf Construction Company, Inc. Prior to trial, Adolf’s carrier, USF & G, turned over its insurance limits of $100,000.00 to Cigna’s attorney, who placed the money in an interest-bearing account. The day before trial, Cigna voluntarily dismissed its claim. Thereafter, the trial court entered an order directing Cigna to pay the $100,000.00 in settlement proceeds to United Storage and Lexow. At the time of the non-suit, there was no cross-claim or counterclaim pending against Cigna, and no property had been seized by the court and none was in the custody of the court at that time. See Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.420(a);1 Randle-Eastern Ambulance Service, Inc. v. Vasta, 360 So. 2d 68 (Fla.1978); Romar International, Inc. v. Jim Rathman Chevrolet/Cadillac, Inc., 420 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982).
The settlement proceeds at issue were in the exclusive possession and custody of Cigna at the time of dismissal. Whatever breach of faith or trust may have occurred between the parties, there were no legal obstacles under Rule 1.420(a) that prevented Cigna’s voluntary dismissal. In point of fact, the issue of entitlement to the settlement proceeds as between the parties to this appeal apparently is pending in a federal court action at this time.
The order of the trial court in regard to payment of the $100,000.00 by Cigna must be, and is
QUASHED.
ORFINGER and COWART, JJ., concur. . Rule 1.420(a) provides:
(a) Voluntary Dismissal.
(1) By Parties. Except in actions in which property has been seized or is in the custody of the court, an action may be dismissed by plaintiff without order of court (i) before trial by serving, or during trial by stating on the record, a notice of dismissal at any time before a hearing on motion for summary judgment, or if none is served or if the motion is denied, before retirement of the jury in a case tried before a jury or before submission of a nonjury case to the court for decision, or (ii) by filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared in the action. Unless otherwise stated in the notice or stipulation, the dismissal is without prejudice, except that a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication on the merits when served by a plaintiff who has once dismissed in any court an action based on or including the same claim.
(2) By Order of Court; If Counterclaim. Except as provided in the subdivision (a)(1) of this rule, an action shall not be dismissed at a party’s instance except on order of the court and upon such terms and conditions as the court deems proper. If a counterclaim has been served by a defendant prior to the service upon him of the plaintiffs notice of dismissal, the action shall not be dismissed against defendant’s objections unless the counterclaim can remain pending for independent adjudication by the court. Unless otherwise specified in the order, a dismissal under this paragraph is without prejudice.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
84 Lumber Co. v. Cooper, 656 So. 2d 1297 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…ingly, either party is entitled to bring a separate cause of action directed to the issue of reimbursement under the subrogation clause of 84 Lumber’s health plan, assuming such a cause of action still exists. See Cigna v. United Storage Sys., Inc., 537 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); Lopez v. Peter R. Brown Co., 492 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).4 We pause to wonder what each party’s jurisdictional position would have been had the trial court awarded 84 Lumber the full amount of its claim and Cooper had ap…
-
Durie v. Hanson, 691 So. 2d 485 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)…sters & Goldstein, C.P.A., P.A. v. Homestead Ins. Co., 604 So. 2d 487 (Fla.1992); Colucci v. Greenfield, 547 So. 2d 224, 225 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing final judgment entered after voluntary dismissal); see also Cigna v. United Storage Sys. Inc., 537 So. 2d 129, 130 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988) (quashing order directing party to pay settlement proceeds entered after that party had filed a notice of voluntary dismissal); Freeman v. Mintz, 523 So. 2d 606, 609 (Fla. 3d DCA) (finding that trial court was without jurisd…
-
Cigna v. Adolf Constr. Co., Inc., 549 So. 2d 252 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)…PER CURIAM. REVERSED. See Cigna v. United, Storage Systems, Inc., 537 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). DAUKSCH, COWART and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Randle-Eastern Ambulance Serv., Inc. v. Vasta, 360 So. 2d 68 (Fla. 1978)
- Romar Int'l, Inc. v. JIM Rathman Chevrolet/Cadillac, Inc., 420 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)