Osborne v. Reardon

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Osborne v. Reardon

696 So. 2d 1344, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 8433, 1997 WL 408896

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 23, 1997

DocketNo. 97-376

StatusPublished

This text of 696 So. 2d 1344 (Osborne v. Reardon) 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.

Bluebook

Osborne v. Reardon, 696 So. 2d 1344, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 8433, 1997 WL 408896 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

While the trial court correctly declined to entertain the pétition for modification because of the pendency of an identical proceeding being maintained by the appellant in another county, it should have not dismissed, but rather stayed the present case pending the resolution of the earlier one. 1 Fla. Jur.2d Actions § 39 (1977). The order of dismissal is therefore vacated, and the cause is remanded for the entry of an appropriate stay order.

Vacated, remanded.

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

PER CURIAM.

While the trial court correctly declined to entertain the pétition for modification because of the pendency of an identical proceeding being maintained by the appellant in another county, it should have not dismissed, but rather stayed the present case pending the resolution of the earlier one. 1 Fla. Jur.2d Actions § 39 (1977). The order of dismissal is therefore vacated, and the cause is remanded for the entry of an appropriate stay order.

Vacated, remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

696 So. 2d 1344, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 8433, 1997 WL 408896, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/osborne-v-reardon-fladistctapp-1997.