WGC, INC. v. Man Co.

360 So. 2d 1152
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJuly 25, 1978
Docket77-2221, 77-2249
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 360 So. 2d 1152 (WGC, INC. v. Man Co.) 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
WGC, INC. v. Man Co., 360 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. Ct. App. 1978).

Opinion

360 So.2d 1152 (1978)

W.G.C., INC., and Guardian Insurance Company, Appellants,
v.
The MAN CO., etc., et al., Appellees.
The MAN CO., etc., et al., Appellants,
v.
W.G.C., INC., et al., Appellees.

Nos. 77-2221, 77-2249.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 25, 1978.

*1153 Daniel P. Tunick, Miami, for W.G.C. and Guardian.

Donald F. Frost, Miami, for The Man Co.

Before PEARSON, NATHAN and KEHOE, JJ.

NATHAN, Judge.

By these consolidated appeals, both plaintiff/counter-defendants, and defendant/counter-plaintiffs, urge reversal of an order of the trial court which dismissed with prejudice, actions arising from a real estate transaction between the parties. We find that dismissal with prejudice was too harsh a remedy and therefore, we reverse.

The record reveals that both sides failed to comply with an order of the trial court which required that pre-trial catalogues be filed at least ten days prior to trial date. However, such non-compliance is not shown to have been willful nor, more importantly, does either side claim prejudice as a result. Indeed, both sides seek reversal of the order of dismissal.

While it is within the discretion of the trial court to impose sanctions for non-compliance with court orders, the court abused its discretion in dismissing these causes with prejudice where no prejudice was asserted by either side. It was error to condemn the litigants to the loss of their right to access to the courts because of their attorneys' non-willful failure to comply with a court order. Travelers Insurance Company v. Rodriguez, 357 So.2d 464 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). The other point raised on appeal is deemed to be without merit and will not be discussed.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

Arango v. Alvarez
585 So. 2d 1131 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Morales v. Perez
445 So. 2d 393 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
Watson v. Peskoe
407 So. 2d 954 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Pinakatt v. Mercy Hospital, Inc.
394 So. 2d 441 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Ferrante v. Waters
383 So. 2d 749 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
Ramos v. Sanchez
375 So. 2d 51 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1979)
Bernuth Marine Shipping, Inc. v. INTEGRATED CONTAINER SERV. INC.
369 So. 2d 424 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
360 So. 2d 1152, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wgc-inc-v-man-co-fladistctapp-1978.