JENNIFER MUNOZ, ETC., ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
PEDRO ALVAREZ, M.D., ET AL., APPELLEES

Fla. 3d DCA | 2000-12-20
No. 3D00-473
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and SORONDO and RAMIREZ, JJ.
774 So. 2d 801 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2000) Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases

Topics

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Malpractice cases and more on FLexlaw


Opinion of the Court
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

The plaintiffs appeal from an order dismissing their malpractice case because of a supposed violation of a court order to secure replacement counsel or give notice of their desire not to do so. See Kreiser Constr., Inc. v. Trafford, 699 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).

Because the order does not, as required, state that the claimed noncompliance was willful or deliberate, see Walden v. Adekola, 773 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Visoly v. Kluger, Peretz, Kaplan & Berlin, P.A., 707 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998) and, more important, because the circumstances revealed by the record show, as a matter of law, that no such finding could be properly rendered or sustained, see Commonwealth Fed. Savings & Loan Ass’n v. Tubero, 569 So. 2d 1271 (Fla.1990), the order on appeal is reversed and the cause is remanded for trial.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Deer Valley Realty v. Beck & Lee, P.A., 260 So. 3d 413 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)
  • …anting the dismissal, and the trial court made no finding that appellant had intentionally disregarded the order of the court. Such an express written finding is essential to justify the severe sanction of default.” Id.; see also Munoz v. Alvarez, 774 So. 2d 801, 801 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (reversing order dismissing case for failure to comply with a court order to retain new counsel “[b]ecause the order does not, as required, state that the claimed noncompliance was willful or deliberate”); Visoly v. Kluger, P…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw