SHANIAH ROLLE, A MINOR BY AND THROUGH HER NATURAL PARENT AND GUARDIAN, QUEEN SERIAH AZULLA DABRIO, AND QUEEN SERIAH AZULLA DABRIO, INDIVIDUALLY, PETITIONERS,
v.
GARY A. BIRKEN, M.D., ET AL., RESPONDENTS
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.
The court granted a writ of mandamus compelling the trial court to set a case for trial within 120 days, holding that once a case is at issue and a notice for trial is filed, the court must set a trial date regardless of incomplete discovery or internal court procedures.
Once a case is procedurally at issue and a proper notice for trial is filed, the trial court must set a trial date within a reasonable time, and internal court operating procedures cannot override this obligation.
[1] Once a case is procedurally at issue and a notice for trial is properly filed, the trial court must set a trial date within a reasonable time pursuant to Florida Rule of…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“Internal operating procedures of the court must give way to the rules of procedure promulgated by the Florida Supreme Court.”
The court explained why the trial court's reliance on internal procedures to delay setting trial was improper.
Petitioners filed notices for trial in a medical malpractice case that was at issue, but the trial court refused to set a trial date because discovery…
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 At Issue cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioners seek a writ of mandamus to compel the trial court to set this case for trial. The parties do not dispute that the case is “at issue,” as contemplated by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.440, and that several notices for trial informed the court of such. Nevertheless, the trial court has refused to set a trial date because discovery is not yet completed and because internal court procedures presumably do not allow a case to be set for trial in the backup division, where longer trials such as this one are tried, without the completion of a certificate of readiness for trial by all parties. We have jurisdiction, grant the petition and issue the writ.
Once a case is procedurally at issue and upon the filing of a proper notice for trial, the court must act upon the notice within a reasonable time and give the parties a trial date. Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.440(a); Garcia v. Lincare Inc., 906 So. 2d 1268, 1269 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Ivans v. Greenbaum, 613 So. 2d 130 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Kubera v. Fisher, 483 So. 2d 836, 838 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). Accordingly, the application for writ of mandamus is granted. See id. Internal operating procedures of the court must give way to the rules of procedure promulgated by the Florida Supreme Court.
The trial judge is directed forthwith to set this case for trial on a date no more than one-hundred and twenty days from this date, and thereafter to proceed to a conclusion of the case in the ordinary course.
Mandamus granted.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
SR Acquisitions-Florida City, LLC v. SAN Remo Homes AT Fla. City, LLC, 78 So. 3d 636 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)…. 1st DCA 1998). A trial court has broad discretion to manage its docket, but must do so within the confines of governing statutes and rules of procedure. See Phoenix Holding, LLC v. Martinez, 27 So. 3d 791, 793 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010); Rolle v. Birken, 994 So. 2d 1129, 1130 (Fla. 3d. DCA 2008) (granting mandamus to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure as to the setting of a trial date); accord Flagship Nat’l Bank of Miami v. Testa,, 429 So. 2d 69, 70 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (…
Authorities Cited
- Kubera v. Fisher, 483 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)
- Ivans v. The Honorable Martin Greenbaum, 613 So. 2d 130 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
- Garcia v. Lincare Inc., 906 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)