JAMES ASH RANDLE AND GEORGE L. ONETT, AS CO-EXECUTORS OF THE ESTATE OF ROBERT W. RANDLE, DECEASED, APPELLANTS,
v.
GENEVIEVE L. RANDLE, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1973-03-06
No. 72-1372
Before BARKDULL, C. J., and HEN-DRY and HAVERFIELD, JJ.
274 So. 2d 557 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1973) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This interlocutory appeal is from an order of the Circuit Court of Dade County, Florida, denying appellants’ motion to amend their answer and add a counterclaim which was filed two and one-half years after their original answer, and just prior to a hearing on a motion for summary judgment.

Appellants contend that the court abused its direction in refusing to allow the additional pleadings.

We have considered the record on appeal, briefs and arguments of counsel and have concluded that no abuse of discretion has been made to appear.

As this court and other appellate courts have held, where no such showing is made the ruling of the trial judge will not be disturbed. 2765 South Bayshore Drive Corp. v. Fred Howland, Inc., Fla.App. 1968, 212 So.2d 911; United States v. State, Fla.App. 1965, 179 So.2d 890; Corbett v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc., Fla.App. 1964, 166 So.2d 196.

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • …or May, was reset by the court for August, and was ultimately taken off the court docket due to the COVID-19 pandemic. ---PAGE 4--- On the specific facts before us, we cannot find that the trial court abused its discretion. See Randle v. Randle, 274 So. 2d 557 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973) (concluding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellants’ motion to amend their answer and add a counterclaim, which was filed two and one-half years after their original answer and just prior to a h…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw