DIANA SCHREYER, APPELLANT,
v.
ELY LINIADO, D/B/A YOUNG AGES, 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.
The appellate court affirmed a dismissal for want of prosecution, holding that the appellant's excuses for inaction were insufficient to demonstrate good cause for reinstatement.
No, the appellant did not show good cause for her failure to prosecute her case.
“It affirmatively appears from the record in this cause that no action was taken from June 15, 1955, until the appellee moved to dismiss the cause for failure to prosecute on July 11, 1957.”
Establishes the significant period of inactivity in the case.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant, a resident of California and a housewife without means to travel, took no action in her case for over two years. The appellee moved to …
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 Dismissal For Failure To Prosecute cases and more on FLexlaw
This appeal is from a final judgment of dismissal entered for want of prosecution. It affirmatively appears from the record in this cause that no action was taken from June 15, 1955, until the appellee moved to dismiss the cause for failure to prosecute on July 11, 1957. No petition, as such, for reinstatement was filed by the appellant after the entry of the final judgment. However, in the appellant’s petition to avoid dismissal, she gives as her excuses for failure to prosecute the fact that she is a resident of the State of California, that she has not been present in the.State of Florida since May, 1950, and that she is a housewife without the means to come to Florida; all of which she charges to be within the knowledge of the appellee.
Section 45.19, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., in substance, provides that actions which have not been prosecuted for a period of one year shall be abated and upon motion dismissed by the court having jurisdiction of the cause. It further provides for reinstatement upon “good cause shown to the court.” In Miller v. Hartley’s, Fla.App.1957, 97 So.2d 211, the excuse for the failure to prosecute was similar to that urged by the appellant here. The court in the Miller case found that such was not “good cause” within the meaning of the statute, sufficient to warrant reinstatement. We feel that the Miller case is determinative of the only issue subject to review in this cause, and accordingly, the judgment appealed from should be, and it is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
CARROLL, CITAS., C. J., and PEARSON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McALLISTER Hotel, Inc. v. Porte, 123 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 1959)…919.05 (1957), F.S.A.; Lutins v. State, 1940, 142 Fla. 288, 194 So. 803; Nelson v. State, 1941, 148 Fla. 338, 4 So. 2d 375; Brown v. State, 1943, 152 Fla. 508, 12 So. 2d 292; Bates v. State, Fla.App.1958, 102 So. 2d 826 (certiorari denied Fla.1958, 100 So. 2d 199). . An intelligent answer to the proposition, propounded by the jury might well have required the trial judge to have commented on the evidence in the cause, a power which he does not possess. . 23 Fla. Juris. New Trial, Section 11 (1959); Warner…
-
Barrentine v. Vulcan Materials Co., 216 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968)…order of dismissal.” . Little v. Sullivan (Fla.1965), 173 So. 2d 135; Adams Engineering Company v. Construction Products Corporation (Fla.1963), 156 So. 2d 497. . Allen v. Gaither (Fla.App.1959), 112 So. 2d 855; Schreyer v. Liniado (Fla.App.1958), 100 So. 2d 199; Miller v. Hartley’s, Inc. (Fla.App.1957), 97 So. 2d 211; Railway Express Agency v. Hoagland (Fla.1952), 62 So. 2d 756.…
-
Soshana Dashew v. Hy Marks, 352 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…178 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1965). . Elmer A. Yelvington & Sons, Inc. v. Sheridan, 65 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 1953). Also see: Dobson v. Crews, 164 So. 2d 252 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964). . Laug v. Murphy, 205 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968); Schreyer v. Liniado, 100 So. 2d 199 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1958).…
Authorities Cited
- Lenore Miller v. Hartley's, Inc., 97 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA 1957)