Want Of Prosecution

78 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Boazman v. Econ. Lab., Inc.
  537 F.2d 210· 5th Cir.· 1976-08-20 ·cited 103×
  The court held that dismissal for want of prosecution, even without prejudice, is reversible error when the statute of limitations may bar refiling and the conduct was not contumacious, and that summary judgment cannot be granted solely for failure to respond without the movant m
• Matilda Wade v. Doyle
  17 Fla. 522· Fla.· 1880-01-01 ·cited 63×
  In this ejectment action, the Florida Supreme Court reversed the lower court's judgment for the defendant, holding that the defendant's special pleas were invalid under the statute of limitations and that the trial proceedings were conducted improperly after the plaintiffs refuse
• United States v. Simmons
  536 F.2d 827· 9th Cir.· 1976-05-24 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in dismissing the indictment with prejudice under both the Sixth Amendment speedy trial right and Rule 48(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
• Irwin J. Weiner and Mark R. Rubin v. Nelia Moreno
  271 So. 2d 217· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-01-03 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the summary judgment on liability was premature because proximate cause of the client's death remained a triable issue.
• Rayford v. Pryor, Jr.
  769 F.2d 281· 5th Cir.· 1985-08-26 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the appeal from the dismissal was untimely and that the denial of the motion to retain, treated as a Rule 60(b) motion, was not an abuse of discretion due to untimeliness and lack of extraordinary circumstances.
• Ry. Exp. Agency, Inc. v. Hoagland
  62 So. 2d 756· Fla.· 1952-12-19 ·cited 36×
  Railway Express Agency appealed the reinstatement of a negligence suit that had been dismissed for lack of prosecution. The Florida Supreme Court reversed, holding that the plaintiff's excuses—including being abroad and needing time to complete an audit—did not constitute good ca
• Link v. Wabash R.R. Co.
  291 F.2d 542· 7th Cir.· 1961-05-26 ·cited 32×
  The court held that dismissing a plaintiff's case due to counsel's absence from a pretrial conference, without a court order directing the plaintiff to appear, constitutes an improper punishment of an innocent litigant for the attorney's conduct.
• Lenore Miller v. Hartley's, Inc.
  97 So. 2d 211· Fla. 3d DCA· 1957-10-03 ·cited 30×
  Miller appealed a summary judgment for Hartley's Inc. in her malicious prosecution suit. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by reinstating Miller's case after it was dismissed for want of prosecution, as she failed to demonstrate good
• Sweeney v. Anderson and eight other cases
  129 F.2d 756· 10th Cir.· 1942-07-20 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the cases for want of prosecution after refusing a continuance.
• Herron v. Jupiter Transp. Co.
  858 F.2d 332· 6th Cir.· 1988-10-03 ·cited 28×
  The court held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 applies to actions removed from state court, and an attorney has a continuing duty to ensure pleadings are well-grounded in fact and law, even after removal.
• Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Hill
  76 So. 2d 861· Fla.· 1955-01-07 ·cited 28×
  The appellee, Hill, sued the appellant railroad for injuries and property damage sustained in a train-automobile collision at a railroad crossing. After a jury verdict for Hill, a remittitur was entered, and a final judgment was entered for $4,000, from which the railroad appeale
• Laug v. Murphy
  205 So. 2d 695· Fla. 4th DCA· 1968-01-17 ·cited 24×
  Murphy sued defendants Laug and London in 1961. The case was dismissed for want of prosecution in 1965, but the trial court reinstated it based on Murphy's petition claiming negotiation efforts and hardship. The appellate court reversed, holding that Murphy's stated grounds were
• Elmer A. Yelvington & Son, Inc. v. Sheridan et ux.
  65 So. 2d 44· Fla.· 1953-05-08 ·cited 24×
  Elmer A. Yelvington & Son filed a lien foreclosure action in 1948, but the case languished for nearly four years with minimal activity. The lower court dismissed the case for want of prosecution under Florida Statute 45.19, and the Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the plainti
• Luna v. Int'l Ass'n OF MacHinists & Aerospace Workers Local # 36 & S. Pac. Transp. Co.
  614 F.2d 529· 5th Cir.· 1980-03-28 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district judge abused his discretion in denying appointed counsel and dismissing the suit with prejudice, and vacated the award of attorneys' fees.
• United States v. Clay
  481 F.2d 133· 7th Cir.· 1973-06-18 ·cited 20×
  An order dismissing an indictment for unnecessary pre-indictment delay under Rule 48(b) is appealable, and such dismissal is an error if not based on constitutional grounds or a clear, uniformly applied district rule.
• Moore v. ADA Fletcher
  159 Fla. 478· Fla.· 1947-09-30 ·cited 20×
  The court reviewed an order overruling a motion to dismiss a bill in equity seeking specific performance of a contract for the sale of real estate, which was filed by an ancillary administrator to raise funds for the estate.
• Hewitt v. Int'l Shoe Co.
  110 Fla. 37· Fla.· 1933-05-03 ·cited 20×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a judgment of non prosequitur (dismissal for failure to prosecute) entered against a plaintiff is a final, appealable judgment when it results from the plaintiff's refusal to proceed under adverse court rulings on pleadings. The Court reversed
• Drake v. Sw. Bell Tel. Co.
  553 F.2d 1185· 8th Cir.· 1977-05-04 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the five-year Missouri statute of limitations applies to claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and the interlocutory order dismissing the § 1981 claim was reviewable on appeal.
• Salmon v. City OF Stuart
  194 F.2d 1004· 5th Cir.· 1952-03-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the appeal was timely taken and that the trial court was authorized to dismiss the action for want of prosecution.
• Daniels v. Brennan
  887 F.2d 783· 7th Cir.· 1989-10-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case for want of prosecution, nor in denying the plaintiff's subsequent motion for relief under Rule 60(b).
• Jardines Bacata v. Aniceto Diaz-Marquez
  878 F.2d 1555· 1st Cir.· 1989-07-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the dismissal of the action against Mrs. Sedan and Belinda Wholesale Florists, Inc. was proper, but the dismissal against Mr. Sedan and his conjugal partnership was an abuse of discretion, and the sua sponte summary judgment for Mr. Diaz was improper due to la
• Pacheco v. Phelps Dodge Ref. Corp.
  531 F.2d 709· 5th Cir.· 1976-05-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in dismissing the appellant's action for want of prosecution, as the appellant demonstrated indifference to pursuing his claim by failing to meet legal time limitations.
• Neff Mach., Inc. v. Allied Elec. Co., Inc.
  258 So. 2d 314· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-02-22 ·cited 12×
  Neff Machinery appealed the dismissal of its breach of contract action for want of prosecution. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court erred in dismissing the case because plaintiff demonstrated good cause for the delay, particularly given the court's own prio
• Gerhard T. Beck and Eva Carol Beck v. Humkey
  146 So. 2d 613· Fla. 1st DCA· 1962-11-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that filing a motion to set a trial date without first complying with a court order to pay costs does not constitute affirmative prosecution of the action under the statute, and such a petition for reinstatement does not show good cause.
• Early v. Sarasota-Fruitville Drainage Dist.
  67 So. 2d 441· Fla.· 1953-07-21 ·cited 12×
  Early and others sought to quash an order reinstating a tax lien foreclosure suit that had been dormant for nearly 20 years. The Florida Supreme Court held that the drainage district failed to show good cause for reinstatement under Florida statute, and the district's motion for
• Liberty Mut. Ins. v. Elec. Sys., Inc.
  813 F. Supp. 802· S.D. Fla.· 1993-02-19 ·cited 10×
  The employer is not vicariously liable for the employee's negligence because the employee was acting outside the scope of his employment when the accident occurred.
• State Establishment FOR Agric. Prod. Trading v. M/V Wesermunde
  838 F.2d 1576· 11th Cir.· 1988-03-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in ordering arbitration in London because the bill of lading incorporated COGSA, and the foreign arbitration clause lacked express agreement or actual notice, thus conflicting with COGSA's purpose. The court also held that dismissal wi
• United States v. Correia
  531 F.2d 1095· 1st Cir.· 1976-03-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the government's motion for a continuance and subsequently dismissing the indictment.
• Brown v. Harlan E. O'Leary
  512 F.2d 485· 5th Cir.· 1975-05-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the sua sponte dismissal of a case for want of prosecution, without evidence of dilatory action and despite the case being ready for trial, constitutes an abuse of discretion.
• Flack v. Kuhn
  277 So. 2d 593· Fla. 4th DCA· 1973-05-10 ·cited 10×
• Williams v. Robles
  22 Fla. 95· Fla.· 1886-01-01 ·cited 10×
  In this 1886 Florida Supreme Court case, the court addresses whether a circuit judge properly transferred an equity case to another circuit based on the judge's brother-in-law having a financial interest in property at stake in the suit. The court holds that the transfer was proc
• Hulsey v. State OF Tex.
  929 F.2d 168· 5th Cir.· 1991-04-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing claims against the State for improper service and granting summary judgment for the City and officer, as the plaintiff failed to raise genuine issues of material fact.
• Steyr-Daimler-Puch OF Am. Corp. v. Pappas
  852 F.2d 132· 4th Cir.· 1988-07-25 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of SDPA's alter ego claim, holding that such a claim is property of the bankruptcy estate under Virginia law and 11 U.S.C. § 541, and thus the trustee had the authority to compromise it.
• Harl v. The City OF LA Salle & Mayor Aloysius A. Gunia
  679 F.2d 123· 7th Cir.· 1982-05-24 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge believes the majority opinion incorrectly reversed the lower court's decision, arguing the case should have been affirmed on other grounds or dismissed for failure to raise issues below.
• In re Beery v. Turner
  680 F.2d 705· 10th Cir.· 1982-05-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the bankruptcy judge had jurisdiction to adjudicate the debtor a bankrupt, that the debtor was not entitled to a jury trial on the issues presented, and that the district court did not err in finding the debtor was not a farmer.
• Spears v. Chandler
  672 F.2d 834· 11th Cir.· 1982-04-05 ·cited 8×
  The district court's dismissal of the prisoner's action for want of prosecution was erroneous because it was based on an incorrect ruling that the court lacked authority to issue a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum.
• Milu, Inc. v. Duke
  256 So. 2d 83· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-12-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that filing a notice of hearing is sufficient affirmative action to prevent dismissal for want of prosecution under Rule 1.420(e).
• DeVANEY v. Bernard J. Rumsch, M.D.
  247 So. 2d 69· Fla. 1st DCA· 1971-04-01 ·cited 8×
  Plaintiffs appealed dismissal of their negligence action against four defendants for failure to prosecute. The trial court dismissed the case based on one year of inaction, but the appellate court reversed, finding that activity during the relevant period—including depositions an
• Moreno v. Bartley Collins
  362 F.2d 176· 7th Cir.· 1966-06-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that dismissing a case for want of prosecution due to an attorney's failure to appear at a status call, when the party is otherwise innocent and the dismissal is a high penalty, is an abuse of discretion, especially when the court lacked full information.
• Lar (America First) Daly v. Stratton
  304 F.2d 666· 7th Cir.· 1962-06-12 ·cited 8×
  The order denying defendants' motion to vacate the order setting aside a dismissal is not a final, appealable order because the district court had jurisdiction to set aside the dismissal under Rule 60(b) within one year.
• Newport v. Revyuk
  303 F.2d 23· 8th Cir.· 1962-05-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the action with prejudice due to the plaintiff's failure to prosecute and comply with discovery orders, and that the appellants, who acquired the plaintiff's claim, could not overcome this dismissal.
• Leong v. R.R. Transfer Serv., Inc.
  302 F.2d 555· 7th Cir.· 1962-05-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that refusing to vacate a dismissal for want of prosecution, based on attorneys' shared misapprehension about trial timing, constituted an abuse of discretion under Rule 60(b).
• Maloy v. Bristow
  138 So. 2d 801· Fla. 3d DCA· 1962-03-15 ·cited 8×
  The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal of a plaintiff's suit for an accounting due to lack of prosecution. The court found the trial judge acted correctly in dismissing the case after the plaintiff repeatedly failed to proceed with the trial, despite being give
• Jameson v. DU Comb
  275 F.2d 293· 7th Cir.· 1960-03-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case for want of prosecution and that the dismissal was not error.
• United States v. Litton Sys., Inc.
  722 F.2d 264· 5th Cir.· 1984-01-13 ·cited 7×
  The court held that Litton's Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial was not violated, and dismissal was not appropriate. The court also found no grounds for dismissal under Rule 48(b).
• Knowles v. Gilbert
  208 So. 2d 660· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-04-09 ·cited 7×
  Appellant Knowles sought reversal of an order denying her motion to reinstate a civil action that had been dismissed for want of prosecution. The court held that filing a notice of hearing on a pending motion constitutes actionable progress on the case that prevents dismissal for
• Robertson v. Wilson
  59 Fla. 400· Fla.· 1910-01-01 ·cited 7×
  Robertson sued Wilson and the case languished for nearly seven years due to referee negligence and administrative failures, not plaintiff's inaction. The Circuit Court dismissed for want of prosecution, but the Florida Supreme Court reversed, finding the delay was not attributabl
• Nichols v. Lohr
  776 So. 2d 366· Fla. 5th DCA· 2001-02-02 ·cited 6×
  This appeal addresses whether a notice of deposition filed in the wrong case file constitutes record activity to prevent dismissal for lack of prosecution. The court held that a notice of deposition does not constitute record activity designed to move a case toward trial, and aff
• Donald v. Balfour J. Rast
  927 F.2d 379· 8th Cir.· 1991-03-01 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge believes the trial court erred in excluding evidence, thus denying the appellant a fair trial.
• Caribbean Transp. Sys., Inc. v. Autoridad DE LAS Navieras de Puerto RICO
  901 F.2d 196· 1st Cir.· 1990-04-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing the case for failure to prosecute under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).