Novak v. Corning Glass Works, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Novak v. Corning Glass Works, Inc.

636 So. 2d 606, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 5112, 1994 WL 226594

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 27, 1994·No. No. 93-2157·Published

Opinion

GRIFFIN, Judge.

This is the appeal of an order dismissing the action for want of prosecution. Appellants contend that there was non-record activity sufficient to meet the “good cause” component of Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.420(e). Specifically, appellants refer to correspondence concerning the subject of possibly settling the action and concerning a dispute over expert witness fees. We affirm because we find nothing in the record to suggest that the lower court abused its discretion in finding a lack of “good cause” why the action should not be dismissed.

AFFIRMED.

DAUKSCH and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.

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

GRIFFIN, Judge.

This is the appeal of an order dismissing the action for want of prosecution. Appellants contend that there was non-record activity sufficient to meet the “good cause” component of Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.420(e). Specifically, appellants refer to correspondence concerning the subject of possibly settling the action and concerning a dispute over expert witness fees. We affirm because we find nothing in the record to suggest that the lower court abused its discretion in finding a lack of “good cause” why the action should not be dismissed.

AFFIRMED.

DAUKSCH and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.

Novak v. Corning Glass Works, Inc., 636 So. 2d 606, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 5112, 1994 WL 226594 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

636 So. 2d 606 (Novak v. Corning Glass Works, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.