Ramos v. Sanchez, 79-397
| Decision Date | 19 September 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 79-397,79-397 |
| Citation | 375 So.2d 51 |
| Parties | Savarino RAMOS, Sr., Appellant, v. Jean Castleberry SANCHEZ, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
John R. Snow, Fort Myers, for appellant.
Bruce D. Frankel of Goldberg, Rubinstein & Buckley, Fort Myers, for appellee.
By this appeal appellant seeks review of an order of the trial court dismissing with prejudice an amended complaint for negligence because appellant was unable to provide certain information to appellee within the time ordered by the trial judge. We reverse.
The trial court in its order dismissing the cause made the following findings of fact:
1. The Plaintiff's Attorney, John R. Snow, telephoned the Defendant, JEAN CASTLEBERRY SANCHEZ, prior to filing suit.
2. The Plaintiff's Attorney, John R. Snow, misrepresented his identity to the Defendant at the time of instituting this telephone conversation.
3. The Plaintiff's Attorney taped his telephone conversation with the Defendant. This Court ordered the Plaintiff's Attorney to produce his tape recording on or before January 15, 1979. The plaintiff's Attorney has not produced this tape and cannot adequately account for its whereabouts.
We are well aware that the trial court does have the authority to dismiss a cause as a sanction for failure to comply with a court order or for violation of a discovery rule. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.380(b)(2)(C); Warriner v. Ferraro, 177 So.2d 723 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965), Cert. denied, 188 So.2d 319 (Fla.1966), Cert. denied, 385 U.S. 995, 87 S.Ct. 610, 17 L.Ed.2d 454 (1966). Obviously, dismissal of a cause in the preliminary stages of the proceedings is both a harsh and extreme sanction and consequently should be resorted to only when a lesser sanction would not suffice. This is particularly so when the noncompliance or failure is entirely the result of the attorney's conduct, as here, and not the result of any conduct on the part of the litigant. Travelers Ins. Co. v. Rodriguez, 357 So.2d 464 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978); W. G. C., Inc. v. The Man Co., 360 So.2d 1152 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).
We hold that under the circumstances of this case the dismissal of the cause with prejudice was too severe a sanction to impose against appellant and that a less severe sanction would more appropriately serve the ends of justice. True, the attorney for appellant failed to produce the tape in question claiming he was unable to locate it. However, the court did not find that the attorney was in willful noncompliance. In the case of Swindle v. Reid, 242 So.2d 751 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971), the Fourth District Court of Appeal held:
We deem it important to note that the order of dismissal in this case did not contain any...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kozel v. Ostendorf
...sanctions that simply cause a party to sue its lawyer for malpractice. See Beasley v. Girten, 61 So.2d 179 (Fla.1952); Ramos v. Sanchez, 375 So.2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); Anthony v. Schmitt, 557 So.2d 656 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), approved, Del Duca v. Anthony, 587 So.2d 1306 (Fla.1991); Wilson v.......
-
A. H. Robins Co., Inc. v. Devereaux
...Watson v. Peskoe, 407 So.2d 954 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Hart v. Weaver, 364 So.2d 524 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). See also Ramos v. Sanchez, 375 So.2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979), where it was held that dismissal as a sanction for failure to comply with a court order for discovery is both harsh and extreme a......
-
Santuoso v. McGrath & Associates, Inc.
...entering the default against the defendants did not recite that Santuoso's failure to submit to discovery was willful. Ramos v. Sanchez, 375 So.2d 51 (Fla.2d DCA 1979). Under the circumstances presented, we hold the sanction consisting of the entry of default as to liability against Santuos......
-
Allendorfer v. Wood
...the court may then impose sanctions, one of which is dismissal of the action. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.380(b)(2)(C); Johnson; Ramos v. Sanchez, 375 So.2d 51 (Fla.2d DCA 1979). However, it is a general principle that the punishment for disregard of a court order should fit the crime. Smalley v. Layne,......