LYNN G. LENFESTEY, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES BALLOON CORP., APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Sanction Of Dismissal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We reverse the order of the trial court dismissing this case for failure of the pro se appellant to attend a case management conference. The order of dismissal failed to contain an express finding of deliberate and contumacious disregard of the court’s authority. See Commonwealth Fed. Sav. and Loan Ass’n. v. Tubero, 569 So. 2d 1271 (Fla.1990).
Moreover, the record before us only reveals that the pro se litigant did not appear at an 8:45 a.m. case management conference. She had appeared at prior hearings, and she filed motions and other papers in the ease. The sanction of dismissal should be commensurate with the offense. See Insua v. World Wide Air, Inc., 582 So. 2d 102 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). On this record, the court provided the pro se litigant with no notice that her failure to appear would result in dismissal, and appellant’s conduct did not appear to be contumacious of the court’s authority and warrant dismissal.
WARNER, KLEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cooper v. Ford & Sinclair, P.A., 888 So. 2d 683 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)…fee reduced by the amount of the damages suffered by the client as a result of the lawyer’s breach. Searcy, Denney, Scarola, Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. v. Scheller, 629 So. 2d 947, 954 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Kushner v. En-gelberg, Cantor & Leone, P.A., 699 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). The court must consider several factors in determining a quantum meruit award, taking into account the value of the services to the client. Searcy, Denney, Scarola, Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. v. Poletz, 652 So. 2d 366, 369 (Fla.19…
-
First Fairway Condo. I Ass'n, Inc. v. Gulfstream Roofing, Inc., 701 So. 2d 652 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)…trial court seeks to dismiss a lawsuit pursuit to rule 1.200(c) — dismissal being the harshest of all sanctions — the trial court must find that the party’s conduct was “willful and contumacious.” See, e.g., Lenfestey v. United States Balloon Corp., 699 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Zeigler v. Huston, 626 So. 2d 1046, 1047-48 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Kelley v. Schmidt, 613 So. 2d 918, 919-20 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); see also Commonwealth Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n v. Tubero, 569 So. 2d 1271 (Fla.1990). Here, the trial…
-
King v. Young, Berkman, Berman & Karpf, P.A., 709 So. 2d 572 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…has been found unenforceable and the attorney is entitled to a reasonable fee under a quantum meruit theory, we must remand this case back to the trial court for its determination of a reasonable fee. See Kushner v. Engelberg, Cantor & Leone, P.A., 699 So. 2d 850, 851 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Levin v. Rosenberg, 372 So. 2d 956, 958 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), approved by 409 So. 2d 1016 (Fla.1982); Ownby v. Prisock, 243 Miss. 203, 138 So. 2d 279 (1962). I am unaware of any decision which provides an appellate court with…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Commonwealth Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Moshe Tubero, 569 So. 2d 1271 (Fla. 1990)
- Insua v. World Wide AIR, Inc., 582 So. 2d 102 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)