 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Wright v. Sioux City Gospel Mission11/15/2002
Andrew J. Wright appeals from the district court's ruling overruling a motion to reinstate his personal injury case. AFFIRMED.
Andrew J. Wright contends the district court erred in failing to reinstate his case pursuant to Iowa R. Civ. P. 1.944. Wright claims the district court should have reinstated the case under either the mandatory or the discretionary prong of the rule. Reinstatement is mandatory under the rule if the case was dismissed due to oversight, mistake or other reasonable cause. Our review of a denial of a claim of mandatory reinstatement is for errors at law. Ray v. Merle Hay Mall, 621 N.W.2d 696, 699 (Iowa Ct. App. 2000). The district court found the dismissal of plaintiff's case was not the result of "oversight, mistake or other reasonable cause." This finding is supported by substantial evidence in the record, and we therefore affirm the district court's ruling rejecting Wright's claim for mandatory reinstatement.
"Discretionary rulings of the district court are presumptively correct and will be disturbed on appeal only upon clear showing of abuse of discretion." Glenn v. Carlstrom, 556 N.W.2d 800, 804 (Iowa 1996).
Whether a claim for reinstatement is couched as mandatory or discretionary, the party requesting relief has the burden to prove reasonable diligence in the preparation of the case for trial. Berkley Int'l. Co. Ltd. v. Devine, 423 N.W.2d 9, 12 (Iowa 1988). The district court's finding that Wright failed to exercise reasonable diligence in preparing his case for trial is supported by substantial evidence. We find no abuse of discretion in the district court's refusal to grant discretionary reinstatement. Accordingly, our standard of review dictates that the district court's ruling be affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
Page 1 Iowa Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|