Case Title: Shands Teaching Hospital v. Janet Louise Warren

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: florida

Court: Florida Supreme Court

Date: 1999-10-21T00:00:00Z

Document:
Supreme Court of Florida
 
SHANDS TEACHING HOSPITAL AND CLINICS, INC. etc., et al.,
Petitioners,
vs.
JANET LOUISE WARREN,
Respondent.
No. 91,718
[October 21, 1999]
HARDING, C.J.
We have for review the decision in Warren v. Shands Teaching Hospital & Clinics,
Inc., 680 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996), based upon conflict with the Fourth District
Court of Appeal's opinion in Stahl v. Evans, 691 So. 2d 1184 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).
We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3) of the Florida Constitution.
For the reasons expressed below, we approve the decision in Warren and remand this
case to the trial court for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
The conflict in these two cases stems from the interpretation of rule 1.070(j) of the
Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.  Specifically, the cases are in conflict regarding the
standard to be applied when determining whether good cause has been shown for late
1 In Amendment to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.070(j)–Time Limit for Service, 720 So. 2d 505 (Fla. 1998),
we proposed on our own motion the amendment to rule 1.070(j).      
-2-
service.
In Warren, the First District Court ruled that the issue of good cause for late service
should be considered in light of the factors announced in Kozel v. Ostendorf, 629 So.
2d 817 (Fla. 1993), and remanded to the trial court with directions to reconsider in
light of Kozel.  In Stahl, the Fourth District Court ruled that the Kozel factors are
inapplicable to the determination of good cause for late service.  While we do not
approve the reasoning of the First District Court, we approve the result reached by that
court. 
In Amendment to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.070(j)–Time Limit for Service,
24 Fla. L. Weekly S109 (Fla. Mar. 4, 1999), this Court recently adopted an amendment
to rule 1.070(j).  The reasons for this rule change are set out in Amendment to Florida
Rule of Civil Procedure 1.070(j) – Time Limit for Service, 720 So. 2d 505 (Fla.
1998).1  Additionally, in the opinion adopting the rule, we stated that the amended rule
shall apply where "just and practicable, to all civil cases pending as of the date of this
opinion [Mar. 4, 1999]."  Amendment to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure
1.070(j)–Time Limit for Service, 24 Fla. L. Weekly at S109.  This case is pending and
consequently the new rule applies.
Accordingly, we approve the decision in Warren and remand to the trial court with
-3-
instructions to apply the new rule.
It is so ordered.
SHAW, WELLS, ANSTEAD and PARIENTE, JJ., and OVERTON and KOGAN,
Senior Justices, concur.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND IF
FILED, DETERMINED.
Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal - Certified
Direct Conflict of Decisions
First District - Case No. 96-2762
(Alachua County)
A. Russell Bobo of Bobo, Spicer, Ciotoli, Fulford, Bocchino, DeBevoise &
LeClainche, P.A., Orlando, Florida, 
for Petitioners
Maria P. Sperando of Gary, Williams, Parenti, Finney, Lewis, McManus, Watson &
Sperando, Stuart, Florida,
for Respondents