JOHN H. BRYANT, JR. AND VICTORIA M. BRYANT
v.
JOHN F. GEOGHAGAN AND USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY
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.
Dismissal for failure to timely move to substitute parties under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.260(a)(1) must be without prejudice.
[1] Dismissal for failure to timely move to substitute parties pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.260(a)(1) must be without prejudice to allow the plaintiff an opp…
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 intelligenceJohn and Victoria Bryant sued John Geoghagan and USAA Casualty Insurance Company. The trial court dismissed their claims against Geoghagan for failure…
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.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
JOHN H. BRYANT, JR. AND
VICTORIA M. BRYANT,
Appellants,
v. Case No. 5D19-3254
JOHN F. GEOGHAGAN AND USAA
CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,
Appellees.
________________________________/
Opinion filed September 18, 2020
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County, Randell H. Rowe, III, Judge.
Eric J. Netcher, of Walker, Revels, Greninger & Netcher, PLLC, Orlando, for Appellants.
Rhonda B. Boggess, of Marks Gray, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellee John
F.
Geoghagan. No Appearance for Appellee USAA Casualty Insurance Company.
PER CURIAM.
John Bryant and Victoria Bryant appeal an order dismissing their claims against John Geoghagan for failure to comply with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.260(a)(1).
2 We conclude that dismissal was proper, but that the dismissal should have been without prejudice. DeArmas v. Blonstein, 356 So. 2d 1339 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978) (concluding that dismissal for failure to timely move to substitute parties pursuant to rule 1.260 should have been without prejudice); see also Wilson v. Pyle, 851 So. 2d 779, 780 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003).
AFFIRMED, in part; REVERSED, in part; and REMANDED.
EVANDER, C.J., LAMBERT and TRAVER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Gardenia DeARMAS v. Blonstein, 356 So. 2d 1339 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- Froman v. Kirland, 851 So. 2d 779 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)