Houchins v. State
This text of 881 So. 2d 62 (Houchins v. State) 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.
Opinion
Ronald W. HOUCHINS and Martha Romero-Huertas, Appellants,
v.
STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Ronald W. Houchins and Martha Romero-Huertas, Margate, pro se.
Frances F. Guasch of Luis E. Ordonez & Associates, Miami, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Appellants argue the trial court's dismissal of their complaint for failing to attend calendar call or obtain substitute counsel as ordered by the court was error because the court failed to make a finding that appellants' failure to comply was willful or contumacious. Appellee agrees and concedes error. We therefore reverse and remand for further proceedings. See Townsend v. Feinberg, 659 So.2d 1218, 1219 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) ("Prior to exercising its discretion to grant dismissal based on failure to comply with a court order, the court must make a finding that the failure to comply was willful or contumacious.").
GUNTHER, WARNER and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
881 So. 2d 62, 2004 WL 1837945, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/houchins-v-state-fladistctapp-2004.