FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY, PETITIONER,
v.
THE HONORABLE JUDGE LOUIS WEISSING, RESPONDENT
FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY, PETITIONER,
THE HONORABLE JUDGE LOUIS WEISSING, RESPONDENT
448 So. 2d 630
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1984)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
In Foremost Insurance Co. v. Barkett, 441 So. 2d 179 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), we granted a writ of mandamus because of an inadequate notice of trial which prejudiced the parties. In the case at bar, the petitioner/ defendant received no notice of trial. See Rule 1.440(b) and (c), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Accordingly, we grant the writ of mandamus and direct the trial court to strike the cause from the April 23rd trial calendar. The matter may be reset within a reasonable period of time and after proper notice in compliance with the rule.
DOWNEY, HERSEY and HURLEY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gawker Media, LLC v. Bollea, 170 So. 3d 125 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)…(Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Rivera v. Rivera, 562 So. 2d 833 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Lauxmont Farms, Inc. v. Flavin, 514 So. 2d 1133 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Bennett v. Cont’l Chems., Inc., 492 So. 2d 724 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co. v. Weissing, 448 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Foremost Ins. Co. v. Barkett, 441 So. 2d 179 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). Indeed, a trial court’s obligation to hew strictly to the rule’s terms is so well established that it may be enforced by a writ of mandamus compelling the court…
-
Genuine Parts Co. v. Parsons, 917 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)…, Inc. v. Hotz Mgmt. Co., Inc., 483 So. 2d 2 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). A writ of mandamus, however, may be issued to enforce compliance with a mandatory rule. See S.W.T. v. C.A.P., 595 So. 2d 1084 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co. v. Weissing, 448 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.440(a) provides that “[a]n action is at issue after any motions directed to the last pleading served have been disposed of or, if no such motions are served, 20 days after service of the last p…
-
Asuncion Santana v. State, 548 So. 2d 293 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989)…uction, was given the whole book of jury instructions. While the trial court cautioned the jury not to read anything but the marked passages, the court felt this was insufficient considering the potential for prejudice. Likewise, in Harmon v. State, 448 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), the jury was sent a set of standard instructions which contained blackened out sections. Although this was not considered reversible error in that case, [*295] the Fifth District commented that the practice of sending in written…
Authorities Cited
- Foremost Ins. Co. v. The Honorable Judge Barrett, 441 So. 2d 179 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)