12 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 215b
Civil procedure — Striking of pleadings — Order granting motion to strike pleadings, specifically finding willful noncompliance, is affirmed
UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE, Appellant, vs. STANGER HEALTH CARE CENTER, Appellee. Circuit Court, 17th Judicial Circuit (Appellate) in and for Broward County. Case No. 03-14212 (08). L.C. Case No. 02-18829 COCE 50. November 24, 2004. J. Leonard Fleet, Judge. Counsel: Stuart B. Yanofsky, Fort Lauderdale.
OPINION
Examination of the record on appeal reveals, beyond question, the dilatory practice on the part of the Appellant. The trial judge, in its July 18, 2003, Order Granting Appellee’s Motion to Strike Appellant’s Pleadings, specifically found willful noncompliance on the part of Appellant. On appeal, Appellant has failed to demonstrate any part of the record reflecting an erroneous conclusion of willfulness on the part of the trial court. Under such circumstances, Appellant has failed to demonstrate an abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court. Commonwealth Federal Sav. and Loan Ass’n v. Tubero, 788 So.2d 1067 (Fla. App. 2d DCA 2001). To justify reversal of sanctions imposed by trial court for discovery violations, the complaining party must show on appeal the trial court clearly erred in its interpretation of facts and use of its judgment. The suggestion another fact finder might have made a different factual determination is insufficient as a matter of law to warrant reversal of the trial court’s findings. Mercer v. Raine, 443 So.2d 944 (Fla. 1983). Indeed, the entire record in this cause shows a continuing pattern of deliberate and contumacious disregard of the court’s authority on the part of appellant, which conduct was condemned in United Services Auto Association v. Strasser, 492 So.2d 399 (Fla. App. 4th DCA, 1986).
For the reasons set forth herein the decision of the court below is affirmed.
* * *
