Driscoll v. Sharp

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Driscoll v. Sharp

711 So. 2d 573, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 14462, 1997 WL 817990

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 31, 1997·No. No. 97-01842·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

NORTHCUTT, Judge.

Dan Driscoll challenges the circuit court’s order dismissing his legal malpractice action for lack of prosecution. The order suggested that the court believed it lacked discretion in the matter. That is not so. Whether a party has shown good cause to avoid dismissal for lack of prosecution is a decision committed to the sound discretion of the court. See Edgecumbe v. American General Corp., 613 So.2d 123 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Therefore, we reverse and remand for the circuit court to reconsider its decision in light of its discretion.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

BLUE, A.C.J., and FICARROTTA, GASPER, J., Associate Judge, concur.

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

NORTHCUTT, Judge.

Dan Driscoll challenges the circuit court’s order dismissing his legal malpractice action for lack of prosecution. The order suggested that the court believed it lacked discretion in the matter. That is not so. Whether a party has shown good cause to avoid dismissal for lack of prosecution is a decision committed to the sound discretion of the court. See Edgecumbe v. American General Corp., 613 So.2d 123 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Therefore, we reverse and remand for the circuit court to reconsider its decision in light of its discretion.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

BLUE, A.C.J., and FICARROTTA, GASPER, J., Associate Judge, concur.

Driscoll v. Sharp, 711 So. 2d 573, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 14462, 1997 WL 817990 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

711 So. 2d 573 (Driscoll v. Sharp) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related