From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cole v. Metropolitan Dade County

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Mar 8, 1988
521 So. 2d 315 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

Opinion

No. 87-1851.

March 8, 1988.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County; Jon I. Gordon, Judge.

Wolfson, Grossman, Herscher Polsky and Marcia Harris Malloy, Miami Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Ginsburg, Co. Atty. and Cynthia Johnson and Eric K. Gressman, Asst. Co. Attys., for appellee.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HENDRY and NESBITT, JJ.


After the trial court announced its intention to rule upon and grant the defendant's motion for directed verdict at the conclusion of the plaintiff's case, plaintiff's counsel announced the taking of a voluntary dismissal under Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.420(a)(1). Contrary to the trial judge's view, it is clear that the dismissal was timely asserted at that stage of the proceedings. Gonzalez v. Mulreany, 375 So.2d 621 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); see Fears v. Lunsford, 314 So.2d 578 (Fla. 1975); Freeman v. Mintz, ___ So.2d ___ (Fla. 3d DCA Case nos. 85-1725, 85-2583 86-417, opinion filed, February 9, 1988) [13 FLW 412]. Consequently, the judgment subsequently entered for the defendant is reversed.

We reject the defendant's contention that the announcement was not sufficiently explicit. In context, the record clearly demonstrates the plaintiff's intention to invoke the voluntary dismissal rule and the trial judge's understanding that this had indeed been accomplished. Compare Tate v. Gray, 292 So.2d 618 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974).


Summaries of

Cole v. Metropolitan Dade County

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Mar 8, 1988
521 So. 2d 315 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)
Case details for

Cole v. Metropolitan Dade County

Case Details

Full title:CAROL COLE, APPELLANT, v. METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Mar 8, 1988

Citations

521 So. 2d 315 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)