Burger King Corp. v. Rudge

630 So. 2d 632, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 59
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 12, 1994·No. Nos. 93-1423, 93-1424·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. The trial court declined to dismiss appellee’s case even though the ap-pellee did not effect service of process upon the appellants within 120 days of filing suit. See Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.070(i).1 The trial court relied upon the holding in Morales v. Sperry Rand Corp., 601 So.2d 538 (Fla.1992), that trial courts have “broad discretion in declining to dismiss an action if reasonable cause for the failure to effect timely service is documented.” Id. at 540. Here, the appel-lee’s attorneys put on substantial evidence demonstrating their own “excusable neglect” in delaying service because a serious ethical question had arisen as to their representation of the appellee. We believe this was sufficient to permit the trial court to exercise its discretion.

ANSTEAD and WARNER, JJ., concur. POLEN, J., concurs specially with opinion.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Burger King Corp. v. Rudge, 630 So. 2d 632, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 59 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

630 So. 2d 632 (Burger King Corp. v. Rudge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Patterson v. Loewenstein
686 So. 2d 776 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)
Devcon International Corp. v. Mejia
636 So. 2d 200 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)