JORGE E. GONZALEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
MICHAEL W. MOORE, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, APPELLEE
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.
Appellant sought review of a circuit court order dismissing his habeas corpus petition for failing to comply with a case management order. The appellate court reversed, finding that appellant had substantially complied with filing requirements and that the circuit court erred in dismissing without giving appellant an opportunity to cure any deficiencies.
The circuit court erred in dismissing the case. The documents appellant filed with the district court satisfied statutory requirements and were transferred to the circuit court as part of the record. The circuit court must specify which documents, if any, have not been provided, and must afford appellant a reasonable opportunity to comply before dismissing.
[1] A case management order requiring the filing of specific documents does not permit dismissal if the required documents have already been filed with a higher court and tra…
[2] A court must provide a party a reasonable opportunity to comply with a case management order before dismissing the case for non-compliance.
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“Because it is apparent from the record that appellant had, in fact, substantially complied with the "Case Management Order," we reverse.”
Establishes the appellate court's core holding that substantial compliance occurred despite the circuit court's dismissal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn February 1998, appellant filed an emergency petition for writ of mandamus/habeas corpus in the district court. He subsequently filed an affidavit o…
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 Case Management Order cases and more on FLexlaw
WEBSTER, J.
Appellant seeks review of an order dismissing his “Emergency Petition for Writ of Mandamus or, in the Alternative, Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus” for “fail[ure] to file any of the documents required” by a “Case Management Order.” Because it is apparent from the record that appellant had, in fact, substantially complied with the “Case Management Order,” we reverse.
In February 1998, appellant filed in this court an “Emergency Petition for Writ of Mandamus or, in the Alternative, Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus.” Appellant subsequently filed an “affidavit of indigen-cy” and other documents required by section 57.085, Florida Statutes (1997). On March 18, 1998, this court issued a certificate of indigency, permitting appellant to proceed without prepayment of costs. Six days later, this court transferred appellant’s petition to the circuit court, pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.040(b).
Shortly after it had received the case from this court, the circuit court issued a form “Case Management Order.” That order directed appellant to provide a number of documents, including those required by section 57.085. The circuit court subsequently dismissed the case, stating that appellant “ha[d] failed to file any of the documents required per this Court’s Case Management Order.” That was error. As already noted, this court had concluded that appellant had complied with section 57.085 before it transferred the case to the circuit court. The documents filed by appellant in this court were transferred to the circuit court, and are a part of the record on appeal. The circuit court’s “Case Management Order” is concerned principally with requiring that such documents be submitted. However, it also requires compliance with certain other directives. Because it is unclear from the record whether appellant has complied with all of the directives in that order, we reverse and remand with directions that the circuit court specify what documents, if any, required by its “Case Management Order” have not already-been provided. Should the circuit court conclude that appellant has not already fully complied with that order, it shall afford appellant a reasonable opportunity to do so before dismissing the case. See Masiello v. Moore, 739 So. 2d 1196 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999).
REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.
DAVIS and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bandy v. Sheffield, 751 So. 2d 164 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…ssed the appellant’s mandamus petition without clarifying what additional filings were needed to comport with the case management order, and without then giving the appellant a reasonable amount of time within which to comply. See Gonzalez v. Moore, 743 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). The appealed order is therefore reversed and the case is remanded. ALLEN, WEBSTER and BROWNING, JJ., CONCUR.…
-
Emory Frank Goodrich v. State, 755 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. Greenwood v. State, 743 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). BOOTH, JOANOS and WEBSTER, JJ., CONCUR.…
-
Esquivel v. Fla. Dep't OF Corr., 866 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…ant do not satisfy this requirement. A copy must be sent to the court.” The circuit court dismissed the case on September 26, 2002, explaining that appellant did not “file a copy of the complaint for each defendant.” Here, as in Gonzalez v. Moore, 743 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), “this court had concluded that appellant had complied with section 57.085 before it transferred the case to the circuit court. The documents filed by appellant in this court were transferred to the circuit court....” Id. at 159…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Masiello v. Moore, 739 So. 2d 1196 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)