From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barker v. Peebles

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Oct 27, 1999
744 So. 2d 551 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

Opinion

No. 98-3301.

Opinion filed October 27, 1999.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Steve Levine, Judge, L.T. No. 98-11485.

Michael Tarre; Williams Connolly, Brenden V. Sullivan, Jr., Peter J. Kahn, Kumiki Gibson, John C. Shipley, Jr. (Washington D.C.), for appellant.

Holland Knight, Daniel S. Pearson, Jose A. Casal and Melinda Burrows, for appellees the RDP Royal Palm Hotel Limited Company and the RDP Shorecrest Hotel Limited Company.

Kenny Nachwalter Seymour Arnold Critchlow Spector, Richard H. Critchlow and Lauren C. Ravkind, for appellee R. Donahue Peebles.

Before COPE, GODERICH and FLETCHER, JJ.


In the underlying derivative action, the plaintiff, Cecile D. Barker, appeals from an order dismissing his complaint without prejudice to refile pending the conclusion of two other lawsuits, one filed in Dade County Circuit Court and one filed in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. We reverse finding that the dismissal was highly prejudicial to the plaintiff as the statute of limitations may run in the derivative action before the Washington D.C. suit is concluded. Accordingly, because the factual issues being litigated in the Washington D.C. suit are similar to the factual issues raised in the derivative action, the trial court should have, as the defendants properly concede, entered a stay pending resolution of the Washington D.C. suit only.

Reversed and remanded with directions.


Summaries of

Barker v. Peebles

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Oct 27, 1999
744 So. 2d 551 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)
Case details for

Barker v. Peebles

Case Details

Full title:CECILE D. BARKER, on behalf of the RDP Royal Palm Hotel Limited Company…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Oct 27, 1999

Citations

744 So. 2d 551 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)