Legal Opinion
Chemrock Corp. v. Tampa Electric Co.
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided November 17, 2009No. 1D08-4895PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHawkes, C.J.
Chemrock appeals the dismissal of its lawsuit due to a lack of prosecution. Tampa Electric filed and served a notice of lack of prosecution on Chemrock under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.420(e) (2008) following ten months of record inactivity. Chemrock responded within the sixty-day grace period created by the amended Rule by filing what it labeled a “motion in opposition.” 1 In the filing, Chemrock admitted there had been a ten-month period of inactivity, but attributed the delay to Tampa Electric. 2 Sixteen months after Chem-rock’s filing, Tampa Electric moved to dismiss the action due…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Diamond Drywall v. Mashan Contractors Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2006
- PATRIOT LEASING v. Jerry Enis MotorsMississippi Supreme Court · 2006
- Padron v. AlonsoDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2007
- Pagan v. Facilicorp, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2008
3Cited by6 opinions
- Chemrock Corp. v. Tampa Electric Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 2011
- Weston Tc Lllp v. Cndp Marketing Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2011
- Bay Park Towers Condominium Ass'n v. Triple M. Roofing Corp.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2010
- Chemrock Corp. v. Tampa Electric Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 2011
- Nastasi v. St. Joe Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2011
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.