Killigan v. City of Lake Butler

821 So. 2d 356, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 8570, 2002 WL 1338041
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 20, 2002·No. No. 1D01-2187·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges an order granting appellees’ motion for involuntary dismissal with prejudice, filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.420(b), as a sanction because of appellant’s alleged misrepresentations during discovery. We reverse because the order fails to include any findings whatsoever. See, e.g., Commonwealth Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n v. Tubero, 569 So.2d 1271 (Fla.1990); Carr v. Dean Steel Bldgs., Inc., 619 So.2d 392 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Cf. Baker v. Myers Tractor Servs., Inc., 765 So.2d 149 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000).

REVERSED.

ALLEN, C.J., ERVIN and KAHN, JJ., concur.

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

Killigan v. City of Lake Butler, 821 So. 2d 356, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 8570, 2002 WL 1338041 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

821 So. 2d 356 (Killigan v. City of Lake Butler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

North Star Beauty Salon, Inc. v. Artzt
821 So. 2d 356 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)