ALBERT EDWARD QUINTON, III, PETITIONER,
v.
ROBERT HORVATH; ANDERSON, MOSS, PARKS & SHEROUSE, P.A., AND ROBERT L. PARKS, RESPONDENTS
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.
The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by denying a motion for continuance when both of the defendant's attorneys became seriously ill.
The defendant's lead attorney and his associate became seriously ill shortly before a complex trial was scheduled to begin. The trial court denied the…
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 Essential Requirements Of Law cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Albert Edward Quinton, III, seeks review of an order denying his motion for continuance of a trial scheduled to begin Monday, April 14. We grant the petition; quash the order under review; and remand.
Quinton is a defendant in 'a complex legal malpractice action filed in 1996 that involves multiple parties, bankruptcy issues, multiple expert witnesses, and automobile franchise litigation. Quinton’s lead attorney was taken seriously ill shortly before trial was originally scheduled to begin in March. The trial court granted a continuance until April 14. In early April, the lead attorney’s associate was also taken seriously ill. Both attorneys are under the care of cardiologists and are precluded from participating in the litigation.
Quinton moved for a continuance of the April 14 trial date; the trial court denied the motion, and in so doing, abused its discretion and departed from the essential requirements of law. See Courtney v. Central Trust Co., 112 Fla. 298, 150 So. 276 (1933) (abuse of discretion to deny motion for continuance when trial counsel unable to proceed because of family emergency); Thompson v. General Motors Corp., 439 So. 2d 1012 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) (abuse of discretion for trial court to deny motion for continuance when trial counsel became ill).
In this case, it was not only Quinton’s lead attorney, but the attorney’s associate as well, who became seriously ill. In light of the complexity of this litigation and the amount of preparation that was required by these attorneys, it was an abuse of discretion for the trial court to deny the motion for continuance.
Certiorari granted; order quashed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
SSJ Mercy Health Sys., Inc. v. Posey, 756 So. 2d 177 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…ee Courtney v. Central Trust Co., 112 Fla. 298, 150 So. 276 (1933) (holding it was an abuse of discretion to deny a motion for continuance on grounds the attorney could not adequately prepare for trial due to his wife’s illness); Quinton v. Horvath, 690 So. 2d 755 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (granting certiorari relief where lead attorney was taken seriously ill shortly before trial was scheduled, trial was continued, then lead attorney’s associate was taken seriously ill shortly before the rescheduled trial date, bot…
-
Genuine Parts Co. v. Parsons, 917 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)…osey, 756 So. 2d 177, 179 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). Occasionally, however, facts will give rise to this form of relief, but that has more often been occasioned by illness affecting the trial lawyer responsible for the case. See, e.g., Quinton v. Horvath, 690 So. 2d 755 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Thompson v. Gen. Motors Corp., Inc., 439 So. 2d 1012 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Outdoor Resorts at Orlando, Inc. v. Hotz Mgmt. Co., Inc., 483 So. 2d 2 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). A writ of mandamus, however, may be issued to enforce compliance…
-
Mich. Nat'l Bank v. Ibis Landing Venture, Ltd., 899 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…8 hours was sufficient time to permit the new attorney to step in and handle the remainder of the trial. Given the facts of this particular case, we believe not. See Thompson, 439 So. 2d at 1013; see also SSJ, 756 So. 2d at 179; Quinton v. Horvath, 690 So. 2d 755 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). We therefore find the trial court’s denial of a continuance under these circumstances to constitute an abuse of discretion and we reverse the case for a new trial on MNB’s claim for real estate commissions and for a determination…
Authorities Cited
- Courtney v. Cent. Tr. Co., 112 Fla. 298 (Fla. 1933)
- Thompson v. Gen. Motors Corp., Inc., 439 So. 2d 1012 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)