Perez v. Unger

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Perez v. Unger

571 So. 2d 67, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9321, 1990 WL 198314

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 11, 1990

DocketNo. 90-1148

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 571 So. 2d 67 (Perez v. Unger) 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

Perez v. Unger, 571 So. 2d 67, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9321, 1990 WL 198314 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

We hold that the trial court abused its discretion in dismissing the pro se plaintiffs claim with prejudice for his failure to appear at the calendar call and for trial, in the light of the undisputed fact that Perez was then an incarcerated state prisoner who was totally unable to attend. Leone v. Florida Power Corp., 567 So.2d 992 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Clay v. City of Margate, 546 So.2d 434 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989), rev. denied, 553 So.2d 1164 (Fla.1989); Zafirakopoulous v. South Miami Int’l Crabhouse, Inc., 513 So.2d 1353 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Schemer v. Peck, 405 So.2d 1033 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981).

Accordingly, the judgment under review is reversed. In accordance with Perez’s specific request, the cause is remanded with directions to set the cause for an expeditious trial, forty-five days or more from the return of the mandate. Perez represents that, if granted this relief, he will be able to secure transportation or otherwise adhere to the requirements for the prosecution of his case, so that if he does not do so with respect to the forthcoming trial, his action will be subject to final dismissal.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

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

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

We hold that the trial court abused its discretion in dismissing the pro se plaintiffs claim with prejudice for his failure to appear at the calendar call and for trial, in the light of the undisputed fact that Perez was then an incarcerated state prisoner who was totally unable to attend. Leone v. Florida Power Corp., 567 So.2d 992 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Clay v. City of Margate, 546 So.2d 434 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989), rev. denied, 553 So.2d 1164 (Fla.1989); Zafirakopoulous v. South Miami Int’l Crabhouse, Inc., 513 So.2d 1353 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Schemer v. Peck, 405 So.2d 1033 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981).

Accordingly, the judgment under review is reversed. In accordance with Perez’s specific request, the cause is remanded with directions to set the cause for an expeditious trial, forty-five days or more from the return of the mandate. Perez represents that, if granted this relief, he will be able to secure transportation or otherwise adhere to the requirements for the prosecution of his case, so that if he does not do so with respect to the forthcoming trial, his action will be subject to final dismissal.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

571 So. 2d 67, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 9321, 1990 WL 198314, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/perez-v-unger-fladistctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack