DA COMERCIALIZADORA S.A.S.
v.
CAROLA CLEVER
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.
Where a plaintiff fails to serve a defendant within 120 days of filing the initial pleading and shows no good cause or excusable neglect, the trial court has discretion to dismiss the action, extend the time for service, or drop the defendant as a party.
[1] When a plaintiff fails to effect service of process within 120 days of filing the initial pleading and demonstrates no good cause or excusable neglect, the trial court ha…
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“Where no good cause or excusable neglect exists, the trial court is left to exercise its discretion as to which of the three options to select, except where the statute of limitations has run.”
Fernandez v. Cohn, 54 So. 3d 1040, 1042 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011), cited by the court to establish the standard for trial court discretion in service of process cases.
DA Comercializadora S.A.S. filed an action against Carola Clever in Miami-Dade County Circuit Court. The plaintiff failed to effect service on the def…
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 Without Prejudice cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed April 29, 2026. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
No. 3D25-1630 Lower Tribunal No. 22-19785-CA-01
DA Comercializadora S.A.S., Appellant,
vs.
Carola Clever, Appellee.
An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Migna Sanchez-Llorens, Judge.
Zumpano Patricios, P.A., and Sebastian Jaramillo, for appellant.
Scott J. Edwards, P.A, and Scott J. Edwards (Boca Raton), for appellee.
Before LOGUE, BOKOR and GOODEN, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.070(j) (“If service of the initial process and initial pleading is not made on a defendant within 120 days after filing of the initial pleading directed to that defendant the court, on its own initiative after notice or on motion, must direct that service be effected within a specified time or must dismiss the action without prejudice or drop that defendant as a party; provided that if the plaintiff shows good cause or excusable neglect for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period.”); Fernandez v. Cohn, 54 So. 3d 1040, 1042 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (“Where no good cause or excusable neglect exists, the trial court is left to exercise its discretion as to which of the three options to select, except where the statute of limitations has run.").