Freeman v. Toney
This text of 591 So. 2d 200 (Freeman v. Toney) 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.
Opinions
We reverse. Before the trial court filed the motion and notice of hearing regarding involuntary dismissal, it entered an order directing counsel to advise it of the status of the case. Defendant Orkin responded. We hold that the trial court’s order and Orkin’s response constitutes record activity sufficient to prevent involuntary dismissal. In so holding, we align ourselves with Miami Beach Awning Co. v. Heart of the City, Inc., 565 So.2d 739, 739 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990), in which the court stated that the trial court’s order setting the action for status conference was “reasonably calculated to advance the cause toward resolution.” Contra Caldwell v. Mantei, 544 So.2d 252 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Norflor Construction Corp. v. City of Gainesville, 512 So.2d 266 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). The order dismissing the cause for lack of prosecution is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
591 So. 2d 200, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2414, 1991 WL 35414, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/freeman-v-toney-fladistctapp-1991.