Bader Bros. Van Lines, Inc. v. Jay
| Decision Date | 11 March 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 6010,6010 |
| Citation | 183 So.2d 867 |
| Parties | BADER BROS. VAN LINES, INC., Appellant, v. Sy JAY, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Baker & Baker and Bolton & Furnell, St. Petersburg, for appellant.
Allen P. Allweiss, St. Petersburg, for appellee.
This is an appeal from a Final Judgment entered in favor of the appellee under the following circumstances. The appellee (plaintiff below), in its Complaint, alleged that the appellant was a Florida corporation engaged in business as a common carrier of freight and that the appellee had employed appellant to transport certain furniture and other personal property from Brooklyn, New York, to St . Petersburg, Florida. The appellee claimed damages for the breakage and destruction of some or all of said goods while the same were being transported by the appellant. After filing a Motion To Dismiss, which was denied, the appellant filed an Answer and Counterclaim, the latter alleging a claim for storage, warehousing and other services rendered for the appellee. The appellee then filed his Answer to said Counterclaim and also filed a Demand for Jury Trial.
After the cause was at issue as aforesaid, the Court below, on May 7, 1964, entered an Order directing a Pre-trial Conference on May 25, 1964, which Order contained the following paragraph:
'Upon failure of the attorney to attend a hearing, it shall be within the Court's discretion, sua sponte, to dismiss the suit or strike the answer or take such action as the manifest justice of the cause requires.'
The next entry in the record is a Final Judgment entered on June 10, 1964 in favor of the appellee in the sum of $905.00 principal, plus interest and costs, which judgment contained the following paragraph:
'The above cause being called up for Pre-trial Conference, the Defendant and its counsel having failed to appear after due notice, and the Plaintiff being represented by counsel, the Court, sua sponte, does hereby dismiss the Counterclaim filed by the Defendant, and does strike the Answer of the Defendant, and the Plaintiff herein having produced and filed in this Court his sworn account against said Defendant sued on herein, and the Court being fully advised in the premises, * * *.'
On November 27, 1964, the appellant filed its Motion to Vacate the above judgment on the ground that its attorney of record had failed and neglected to attend the Pretrial Conference without any knowledge on the part of the appellant, and further stated that the appellant had a meritorious defense. Attached...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Popkin v. Crispen
...of action with prejudice. See Goodwyn v. Leesburg Citrus Growers' Association, 1931, 101 Fla. 649, 135 So. 129; Bader Bros. Van Lines, Inc. v. Jay, Fla.App.1966, 183 So.2d 867. The plaintiffs next contend that under the applicable statutes relating to dismissal of actions for want of prosec......
-
Eastern Koex Co., Ltd. v. Bonanza Import & Export, Inc., s. 77-186
...damages, was eminently correct, on authority of Loiselle v. Gladfelter, 160 So.2d 740 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964); Bader Bros. Van Lines, Inc. v. Jay, 183 So.2d 867 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966); and Grappell v. Lauderdale River Park Estates, 126 So.2d 574 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961). We hold, as contended for by appel......
-
Schuppener v. Stein, 78-1145
...a jury trial. Eastern Koex Company Ltd. v. Bonanza Import and Export, Inc., 360 So.2d 153 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Bader Bros. Van Lines, Inc. v. Jay, 183 So.2d 867 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966); Loiselle v. Gladfelter, 160 So.2d 740 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964) cert. disch. 165 So.2d 767 Accordingly, the order of t......
-
Ansel v. Kizer, 82-893
...1.430; Loiselle v. Gladfelter, 160 So.2d 740 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. discharged, 165 So.2d 767 (Fla.1964); Bader Bros. Van Lines, Inc. v. Jay, 183 So.2d 867 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966); Saunders v. Saunders, 346 So.2d 1057 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). Despite appellees' contention on appeal that their damages ......