BUSH RADOMSKI v. KRISAN (2021)

Petitioner, Nicole M. Bush-Radomski, seeks a writ of mandamus from this Court, compelling the trial court to set a trial date in her negligence case. Because the case is procedurally “at issue” under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.440, upon the filing of Petitioner's Notice for Trial, the court had a mandatory duty to set the case for trial. See Kubera v. Fisher, 483 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). It matters not whether Respondent is ready or whether certain discovery remains to be completed. Once a case is procedurally at issue and noticed for trial, the court must act upon the notice and give the parties a trial date.¹ See Garcia v. Lincare, Inc., 906 So. 2d 1268 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005).

PETITION GRANTED; WRIT ISSUED.

FOOTNOTES

1.   As we stated in Garcia:[W]e emphasize that the trial court has discretion to determine which date is chosen for the trial. In doing so, the court may of course consider such issues as discovery completion, availability of witnesses and counsel, and the court's own schedule. Moreover, the trial court has discretion to grant continuances upon proper showing.906 So. 2d at 1269.

HARRIS, J.

TRAVER and WOZNIAK, JJ., concur.