Cabrera v. Pazos (Fla. 2d DCA March 2, 2006)
In Cabrera v. Pazos the Second DCA found that "once a party files a proper rule 1.440(b) notice that a matter is ready for trial, it is the court's duty to set the cause for trial. See Young, 730 So. 2d at 766 ("[I]t is the trial court's responsibility to enter an order setting a date for trial, and it is the filing of the notice which bars the court from dismissing the action for lack of prosecution."). Failure of the trial court to set the case for trial precludes dismissal for failure to prosecute despite the lack of record activity. Reyes, 895 So. 2d at 1274-75; see Pierstorff v. Stroud, 454 So. 2d 564, 565 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). This matter was never scheduled for trial after Mr. Cabrera filed his notice for jury trial.
The trial court abused its discretion when it dismissed Mr. Cabrera's complaint for failure to prosecute pursuant to rule 1.420(e). Accordingly, we reverse the final judgment of dismissal and remand for further proceedings."
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Cabrera v. Pazos (Fla. 2d DCA March 2, 2006).
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://reporter.floridacivpro.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/6
Search the Florida Rules Decisions
Search the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure
Contact the Authors
Brian Willis
Attorney Bio
Email Brian
Jason Baruch
Attorney Bio
Email Jason
Brian and Jason provide legal services to local, national and international clients with business and real estate related legal issues in the Tampa Bay area and across Florida. We always appreciate case referrals from our local and out of state readers. Please contact us at the links above.
Share & Follow
(follow us on Twitter)
(click for RSS feed)
Leave a comment