De Benitez v. Russel

430 So. 2d 524, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 20795
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 26, 1983
DocketNo. 82-2626
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 430 So. 2d 524 (De Benitez v. Russel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
De Benitez v. Russel, 430 So. 2d 524, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 20795 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Since both the plaintiff’s deposition, Latimore v. Matthews, 340 So.2d 1261 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), and her motion to amend the complaint by interlineation, see Mueller v. North Broward Hospital District, 403 So.2d 581 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981), were filed within a year of the motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution under Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.420(e), the order of dismissal under review was erroneous and is reversed. American Salvage & Jobbing Co. v. Salomon, 367 So.2d 716 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Shalabey v. Memorial Hospital of South Broward Hospital District, 253 So.2d 712 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971), cert. denied, 257 So.2d 562 (Fla.1972).

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

Related

Hale v. Hart Properties, Inc.
436 So. 2d 1093 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
430 So. 2d 524, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 20795, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-benitez-v-russel-fladistctapp-1983.