Medina v. Florida East Coast Railway, L.L.C.

921 So. 2d 767, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 2340, 2006 WL 398459
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 22, 2006·No. No. 3D04-1391·Published

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.

After the hearing1 required by Medina v. Florida East Coast Railway, 866 So.2d 89 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004), the trial court again dismissed this personal injury action for fraud on the court on the basis of various alleged omissions and misstatements made by the plaintiff during discovery. We reverse for a jury trial because it is clear the alleged misconduct did not rise to the level of egregiousness required to merit the extreme sanction of dismissal. See Cross v. Pumpco, Inc., 910 So.2d 324 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Rios v. Moore, 902 So.2d 181 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Canaveras v. Cont’l Group, Ltd., 896 So.2d 855 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Ruiz v. City of Orlando, 859 So.2d 574 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003).

Reversed and remanded.

Footnotes

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

Medina v. Florida East Coast Railway, L.L.C., 921 So. 2d 767, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 2340, 2006 WL 398459 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

921 So. 2d 767 (Medina v. Florida East Coast Railway, L.L.C.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rios v. Moore
902 So. 2d 181 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)
Medina v. FLORIDA EAST COAST RY., LLC
866 So. 2d 89 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)
Canaveras v. Continental Group, Ltd.
896 So. 2d 855 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)
Ruiz v. City of Orlando
859 So. 2d 574 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)
Cross v. Pumpco, Inc.
910 So. 2d 324 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)