History
  • No items yet
midpage
Nicholson v. Eli Lilly and Company
285 So. 2d 648
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 1973
|
Check Treatment
285 So. 2d 648 (1973)

Ann NICHOLSON, Appellant,
v.
ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, an Indiana Corporation, et al., Appellees.

No. 73-293.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

October 30, 1973.
Rehearing Denied December 7, 1973.

Levenstein, Burke & Associates, P.A., Miami, for appellant.

Smathers & Thompson and James L. Armstrong, III, West, Goldman & Weisberg; Stephens, Magill, Thornton & Sevier, Miami, and Timothy Carl Blake, for appellees.

Before BARKDULL, C.J., and PEARSON and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant's cause was dismissed with prejudice for lack of prosecution. The record supports a finding by the trial court that the cause was not only subject to dismissal under Rule 1.420(e), 30 F.S.A., but, under the special circumstances presented, was also subject to dismissal with prejudice pursuant to the inherent power of the trial court to eliminate causes from its docket which are not being prosecuted with due diligence. See Rule 1.420(e); Reddish v. Forlines, Fla.App. 1968, 207 So. 2d 703.

Affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Nicholson v. Eli Lilly and Company
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Oct 30, 1973
Citation: 285 So. 2d 648
Docket Number: 73-293
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.