From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

D'Best Laundromat, Inc. v. Janis

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jun 23, 1987
508 So. 2d 1325 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

Summary

reversing dismissal where plaintiff filed four days late

Summary of this case from Hernandez v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp.

Opinion

No. 86-2984.

June 23, 1987.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Francis X. Knuck, J.

Lopez, Perez-Gurri Goldman, and Virginia M. Best, for appellant.

Simon Simon, and Lauren L. Garner, for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and HUBBART, JJ.


This is an appeal by the plaintiff D'Best Laundromat, Inc. from a final dismissal of its amended complaint filed below against the defendant Bernard Janis, individually and as general partner of West Lakes Plaza, Ltd. We reverse the final order under review based on the following briefly stated legal analysis.

First, the legal basis for dismissing the amended complaint was that the plaintiff was four days late in filing the subject amended complaint under a prior trial court order dismissing the plaintiff's original complaint, but allowing the plaintiff ten days to file an amended complaint. Second, the plaintiff was, in fact, four days late in filing the amended complaint under the aforesaid court order and was not, as urged, entitled to five additional days within which to file said amended complaint under Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.090(e). The order allowing the amended complaint ran, by its very terms, from the date the order was signed. The plaintiff was informed of same at the hearing on the motion to dismiss, and the fact that the trial court's conformed order was thereafter mailed to the plaintiff did not invoke the additional five-days-for-mailing provision under Fla.R. Civ.P. 1.090(e). Third, it was an abuse of discretion for the trial court to dismiss the amended complaint because (a) the amended complaint was only four days late, as opposed to the extensive delays in filing amended complaints in cases where dismissals have been upheld, New River Yachting Center v. Bacchiocchi, 407 So.2d 607, 609 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (seven months late), pet. for review denied, 415 So.2d 1360 (Fla. 1982); E E Elec. Contractors, Inc. v. Singer, 236 So.2d 195, 196-97 (Fla. 3d DCA) (sixty-three days late), cert. dismissed, 239 So.2d 827 (Fla. 1970); National Shawmut Bank of Boston v. Woodard, 220 So.2d 636 (Fla. 3d DCA) (almost five months late), cert. denied, 225 So.2d 917 (Fla. 1969), and (b) the defendant demonstrated no prejudice below by the four-day delay in filing the amended complaint other than one created by himself when he unjustifiably took action prior to the entry of the final order of dismissal below. See Wackenhut Protective Sys. v. Key Biscayne Commodore Club Condominium I, Inc., 350 So.2d 1150, 1151-52 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Penn Cork Closures, Inc. v. Piggyback Shippers Ass'n of Fla., 281 So.2d 46, 47 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973).

The final order of dismissal under review is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to reinstate the plaintiff's amended complaint.

Reversed and remanded.


Summaries of

D'Best Laundromat, Inc. v. Janis

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jun 23, 1987
508 So. 2d 1325 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

reversing dismissal where plaintiff filed four days late

Summary of this case from Hernandez v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp.

In D'Best Laundromat, Inc. v. Janis, 508 So.2d 1325 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), the Third District determined that the plaintiff was not entitled to five additional days in which to file an amended complaint, because the order directing the filing of the complaint ran, pursuant to its terms, from the date the order was signed.

Summary of this case from Ocala Geriatric C. Pf. Wk. v. Davis
Case details for

D'Best Laundromat, Inc. v. Janis

Case Details

Full title:D'BEST LAUNDROMAT, INC., APPELLANT, v. BERNARD JANIS, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Jun 23, 1987

Citations

508 So. 2d 1325 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

Citing Cases

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Chatham

Even under this deferential standard, we agree with Wells Fargo that reversalis warranted here. The amended…

Sekot Laboratories, Inc. v. Gleason

In the present case the delay was short, and it was abundantly clear at all times that the plaintiff intended…