HARRY PEARSON, APPELLANT,
v.
ATHENA C. PEFKAROU, M.D., ET AL., APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Lack Of Prosecution cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The trial court dismissed Harry Pearson’s medical malpractice claim for lack of prosecution, pursuant to rule 1.420(e), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Our review of the record reveals that there had been no affirmative activity in the case for a period of one year preceding the filing of the motion to dismiss and good cause had not been shown as to why the action should remain pending. As a consequence the trial court had no choice but to grant the motion. See Industrial Trucks of Fla., Inc. v. Gonzalez, 351 So. 2d 744 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). Mr. Pearson’s suggestion that his status as a pro se litigant should excuse his failure to prosecute his cause on a timely basis, while understandable, must be rejected. Self-representation does not relieve a party of the obligation to comply with the rules of court. See § 454.18, Fla. Stat. (1997); Carr v. Grace, 321 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975), cert. denied, 348 So. 2d 945 (Fla.1977).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lawnwood Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Perry R. Lloyd, III, M.D., 773 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…the non-final orders which are appealable. See In re Estate of Hayward, 463 So. 2d 446 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). Also, the rulings are not reviewable through certiorari because an adequate remedy is available through final appeal. See Bridges v. Bridges, 734 So. 2d 551 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Hayward, 463 So. 2d at 446. Accordingly, we dismiss the cross-appeal without prejudice to appellees seeking review of their claims on final appeal. AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART AND REMANDED. GUNTHER and HAZOURI, JJ., c…
-
Collins v. Collins, 873 So. 2d 1261 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…e-weigh that factual determination. . Contrast the provisions of rule 12.363(b)(2) with those of 12.363(c), allowing an expert who has treated, tested, etc., the child to testify if good cause exists to permit the testimony. See Bridges v. Bridges, 734 So. 2d 551 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).…
-
Devine v. Kirkovich, 754 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)…ever, this is not a substantial reason nor sufficient legal cause for Kirkovich’s failure to timely file his independent action. See In re Estate of Goldman, 79 So. 2d at 848; In re Estate of Wilisch, 384 So. 2d at 223. See also Pearson v. Pefkarou, 734 So. 2d 551 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (rejecting argument that Pearson’s status as pro se litigant should excuse his failure to file his cause on a timely basis). The absence of a substantial reason or sufficient legal cause to justify the extension of time is particu…
Authorities 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)
- Carr v. Grace, 321 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)