WENDY I. YOUNG, APPELLANT,
v.
USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, 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.
An order dismissing a complaint as a sanction must contain an explicit finding of willful noncompliance.
Plaintiff Wendy I. Young's complaint was dismissed with prejudice as a sanction for failing to comply with discovery orders. The trial court's order d…
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 Willful Noncompliance cases and more on FLexlaw
Plaintiff Wendy I. Young appeals the trial court’s dismissal with prejudice of her complaint against USAA Casualty Insurance Company (USAA) as a sanction for Young’s failure to comply with various discovery orders.
“An order dismissing a complaint as a sanction must ‘contain an explicit finding of willful noncompliance.’ ” Carpenter v. McCarty, 810 So.2d 1053, 1054 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (quoting Commonwealth Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n v. Tubero, 569 So.2d 1271, 1273 (Fla.1990)); see also Adlington v. Florida Parole Com’n, 824 So.2d 256, 257 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (citing Lenfestey v. U.S. Balloon Corp., 699 So.2d 850 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)). The order granting dismissal with prejudice must include an explicit finding of willfulness, even when the lower court cites, with specificity, substan*1148tial facts that would support a finding of willfulness. Carpenter, 810 So.2d at 1054.
Here, although the trial court’s order contains details surrounding Young’s failure to comply with the court’s orders and attend depositions, the order does not include an explicit finding of willful noncompliance. Therefore, we reverse and remand for further proceedings. Our decision does not preclude the trial court from entering the same relief as in the instant order.
Reversed and Remanded.
POLEN, TAYLOR and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
London v. Temerian, 257 So. 3d 143 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)
Authorities Cited
- Commonwealth Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Moshe Tubero, 569 So. 2d 1271 (Fla. 1990)
- Lenfestey v. United States Balloon Corp., 699 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
- Douglas v. State, 824 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)
- Carpenter v. McCARTY, 810 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)