From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lamonica v. Safe Hurricane Shutters, Inc.

United States District Court, S.D. Florida
Feb 18, 2011
Case No. 07-61295-CIV COHN/SELTZER (S.D. Fla. Feb. 18, 2011)

Summary

concluding that the alleged financial and logistical burdens of attending trial did not constitute “good cause” or “compelling circumstances” under Rule 43, even where the plaintiffs lived outside of the country and would have to travel internationally

Summary of this case from Casequin v. Cat 5 Contracting, Inc.

Opinion

Case No. 07-61295-CIV COHN/SELTZER.

February 18, 2011


ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR INVOLUNTARY DISMISSAL


THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendants' Motion for Involuntary Dismissal as to Plaintiffs Reinaldo Lamonica, Angeles Lamonica-Soler, Ronaldo Gomez Morsa, Pedro Lopez Vasquez, and Giovani Perez for Failure to Prosecute [DE 137] ("Motion"). The Court has reviewed the Motion, all of the parties' submissions, heard argument of counsel, and is otherwise advised in the premises.

Plaintiffs Pedro Lopez Vasquez and Giovani Perez, proceeding pro se in this matter, failed to respond to the Motion and failed to appear at the Status Conference scheduled for February 17, 2011. Furthermore, counsel for the remaining plaintiffs represented to the Court that Plaintiffs Pedro Lopez Vasquez and Giovani Perez have not responded to his communications. "The authority of a federal trial court to dismiss a plaintiff's action with prejudice because of his failure to prosecute cannot seriously be doubted." Link v. Wabash Railroad Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-31 (1962); see also Fed.R.Civ. p. 41(b). The Court, therefore, will dismiss with prejudice the claims of Plaintiffs Pedro Lopez Vasquez and Giovani Perez for failure to prosecute.

Counsel for Ronaldo Gomez Morsa represents that he has been unable to communicate with Mr. Gomez Morsa. Furthermore, Mr. Gomez Morsa failed to appear for his deposition in this case. Nonetheless, Mr. Gomez Morsa remains represented by counsel who opposes dismissal. Because trial is scheduled to commence in ten days and Defendant has not yet deposed Mr. Gomez Morsa, the Court will dismiss Mr. Gomez Morsa's claim without prejudice.

Defendants, however, have not shown good cause for the dismissal of Plaintiffs Reinaldo Lamonica or Angeles Lamonica-Soler. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendants' Motion for Involuntary Dismissal as to Plaintiffs Reinaldo Lamonica, Angeles Lamonica-Soler, Ronaldo Gomez Morsa, Pedro Lopez Vasquez, and Giovani Perez for Failure to Prosecute [DE 137] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. The claims of Plaintiffs Pedro Lopez Vasquez and Giovani Perez are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The claims of Plaintiff Ronaldo Gomez Morsa are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Motion is DENIED as it pertains to Plaintiffs Reinaldo Lamonica or Angeles Lamonica-Soler.

DONE AND ORDERED in the Chambers of Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida on this 18th day of February, 2011.

Copies provided to counsel of record.


Summaries of

Lamonica v. Safe Hurricane Shutters, Inc.

United States District Court, S.D. Florida
Feb 18, 2011
Case No. 07-61295-CIV COHN/SELTZER (S.D. Fla. Feb. 18, 2011)

concluding that the alleged financial and logistical burdens of attending trial did not constitute “good cause” or “compelling circumstances” under Rule 43, even where the plaintiffs lived outside of the country and would have to travel internationally

Summary of this case from Casequin v. Cat 5 Contracting, Inc.

concluding that the alleged financial and logistical burdens of attending trial did not constitute "good cause" or "compelling circumstances" under Rule 43, even where the plaintiffs lived outside of the country and would have to travel internationally

Summary of this case from Novello v. Progressive Express Ins. Co.

concluding that the alleged financial and logistical burdens of attending trial did not constitute "good cause" or "compelling circumstances" for the purposes of Rule 43

Summary of this case from Powers v. Target Corp.
Case details for

Lamonica v. Safe Hurricane Shutters, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:REINALDO RAMON LAMONICA, et al., on behalf of themselves and other…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Florida

Date published: Feb 18, 2011

Citations

Case No. 07-61295-CIV COHN/SELTZER (S.D. Fla. Feb. 18, 2011)

Citing Cases

Stone Tech. (HK) Co., Ltd. v. Glob. Geeks, Inc.

As the Advisory Committee's Notes explain, this inconvenience is not the type of “good cause” or “compelling…

Skypoint Advisors, LLC v. 3 Amigos Prods.

(concluding that plaintiff failed to establish good cause under Rule 43(a) where the “explanations submitted…