LEMUEL L. COLE, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, MICHAEL HENDERSON, 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.
An inmate appealed the dismissal of his malicious prosecution complaint for lack of prosecution. The court reversed, holding that the inmate's letter to the judge requesting a hearing constituted sufficient record activity to prevent dismissal under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.420(e).
The court held that Cole's letter requesting a hearing on the pending motions constituted sufficient record activity within one year prior to the motion to dismiss, and therefore the trial court erred in granting the dismissal for lack of prosecution.
[1] A trial court's dismissal of a complaint for failure to prosecute will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion.
[2] Record activity is an act reflected in the court file that was designed to move the case forward toward a conclusion on the merits or to hasten the suit to judgment.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“Record activity is an "act reflected in the court file that was designed to move the case forward toward a conclusion on the merits or to hasten the suit to judgment."”
Establishes the legal standard for what constitutes sufficient record activity to avoid dismissal for lack of prosecution.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCole filed a malicious prosecution complaint against the Department of Corrections on October 6, 1992. In June 1994, appellees moved to dismiss for fa…
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 Record Activity cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant, a prison inmate, challenges the dismissal of his complaint for lack of prosecution under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.420(e). We reverse, finding that there was sufficient record activity to prevent dismissal.1
Appellant filed a complaint against the appellees on October 6, 1992, for malicious prosecution. In June of 1994, the appellees sought dismissal of appellant’s complaint because he failed to provide notice to the Department of Insurance, as required by statute. See § 768.28(7), Fla. Stat. (1991). However, appellant maintained that he had given the requisite notice and, as a result, moved to strike the appellees’ motion. Although appellant sent a letter to the presiding judge on July 23, 1995, in an attempt to set a hearing on the pending motions, no such hearings were ever held. In addition, there was no farther record activity until July 8, 1996, when the appellees moved to dismiss appellant’s complaint for lack of prosecution, which the trial court granted after a telephonic hearing.
A trial court’s dismissal of a complaint for failure to prosecute will not be reversed absent an abuse of discretion. See Magers v. Walker’s Cay Air Terminal, Inc., 451 So. 2d 867, 868 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.420(e) provides that, “[a]ll actions in which it appears on the face of the record that no activity by filing of pleadings, order of court, or otherwise has occurred for a period of 1 year shall be dismissed.” “Record activity” is an “act reflected in the court file that was designed to move the case forward toward a conclusion on the merits or to hasten the suit to judgment.” Barnett Bank of East Polk County v. Fleming, 508 So. 2d 718, 720 (Fla.1987). In F.X. Smith v. Broward County, 654 So. 2d 1297, 1298 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), we held that a letter to the judge requesting a trial date is sufficient record activity to avoid dismissal. Similarly, in Wilcox v. Morse, 693 So. 2d 91, 92 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), the second district held that a notice of hearing also serves as sufficient activity to avoid the effect of a motion to dismiss under rule 1.420(e). See also Heinz v. Watson, 615 So. 2d 750, 753 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 624 So. 2d 266 (1993); Gelb v. Miranda, 456 So. 2d 548, 549 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1984).
In this case, appellant sent a letter to the judge requesting a hearing on the pending motions within one year prior to the filing of the motion to dismiss. This request constituted sufficient record activity, and as such, the trial court erred in granting the appellees’ motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
STONE, C.J., GUNTHER and WARNER, JJ., concur. . Although the order granting the motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to prosecute failed to contain all of the words of finality necessary under Dobrick v. Discovery Cruises, Inc., 581 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991), it is clear that the order constituted an end to any further judicial labor. While the plaintiff tried to secure a final order, given his prisoner status he has had no opportunity to press the issue with the trial judge who has not responded to his request for a final order. Under these circumstances and because it is clear that there remains no judicial labor, we address the merits.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Nat'l Enters., Inc. v. Foodtech Hialeah, Inc., 777 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)…he trial court, whose decision will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion.” Palokonis v. EGR Enters. Inc., 652 So. 2d 482, 483 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). See also Kearney v. Ross, 743 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Cole v. Dep’t. of Corrections, 726 So. 2d 854, 855 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Magers v. Walker’s Cay Air Terminal, Inc., 451 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). The appellant in this cause, however, has not provided us with any transcript or stipulation of statement of fact made pursuant to Fla.R.App.P.…
-
Sewell Masonry Co. v. DCC Constr., Inc., 862 So. 2d 893 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…action should not be dismissed due to these multiple periods of non-prosecution and inactivity. The standard of review of a trial court’s dismissal of a cause of action for failure to prosecute is abuse of discretion. Cole v. Dep’t of Corrections, 726 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.420(e) provides that in all actions in which it appears on the face of the record that no activity by filing of pleadings, order of court, or otherwise, has occurred for a period of one year sha…
-
Wilson v. State, 752 So. 2d 1227 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…f the district courts, other than this court, have since held that a defendant cannot be sentenced as an habitual felony offender under the amended petit theft statute. See, e.g., Burke v. State, 734 So. 2d 1175 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Blank v.. State, 726 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Baker v. State, 724 So. 2d 121 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Nelson v. State, 719 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Ridley, supra; Berch, supra. Wilson agreed as a condition of his original plea in the 1993 cases that there was a possibil…
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
- Barnett Bank OF E. Polk Cnty. v. Fleming, 508 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 1987)
- Dobrick v. Discovery Cruises, Inc., 581 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
- Heinz v. Watson, 615 So. 2d 750 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)
- Ansten Tretten and Philip Tretten v. Irrgang, 654 So. 2d 1297 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
- Warren F.X. Smith v. Broward Cnty., 654 So. 2d 1297 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
- Columbus Bridges v. Kitchen, 451 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Magers v. Walker's CAY AIR Terminal, Inc., 451 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)
- Wilcox v. Morse, 693 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)
- Waldemar Morales v. State, 456 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Monroe Gelb and Carl A. Spatz v. Miranda, 456 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)