THE BURKE COMPANY, A CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES TELEPHONE COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1990-10-02
No. 90-1167
Before BARKDULL, FERGUSON and COPE, JJ.
571 So. 2d 33 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1990) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We conclude, contrary to the position of appellant The Burke Company, that a trial court has discretion in the application of Rule 1.060(c), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Here, defendant Burke successfully moved for a transfer of venue under Rule 1.060. Under Rule 1.060(c), plaintiff United States Telephone Company was obliged to pay the clerk’s service charge within thirty days but inadvertently failed to do so. The charge was promptly paid as soon as U.S. Telephone learned it was overdue. Burke contends that the trial court was nonetheless required to dismiss without prejudice under Rule 1.060(c), given that the payment was late. We disagree. The court had discretion in the matter. There is not the slightest suggestion of prejudice to Burke, and the position taken by the trial court is consistent with the admonition that the “rules shall be construed to secure the just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action.” Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.010.

Affirmed.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Abruzzo v. Haller, 682 So. 2d 228 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
    …f his action to the proper court, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the instant action without prejudice pursuant to rule 1.060(c), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. See, Burke Co. v. United States Tel. Co., 571 So. 2d 33 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). AFFIRMED. BOOTH, WOLF and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.…
  • Alvarez v. Merriam-Callahan Ins. Agency, Inc., 843 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)
    …after the 30-day period provided in the rule and several weeks before the motion to dismiss was filed, and there was no suggestion that appellee was in any way prejudiced by the late payment of the transfer fee. Cf., Burke Co. v. U.S. Telephone Co., 571 So. 2d 33 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990), review denied, 576 So. 2d 285 (Fla.1991) (affirming trial court’s refusal to grant dismissal under similar circumstances). The order of dismissal is REVERSED, and the case is REMANDED to the trial court for further proceedings.…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw