At a status hearing, the plaintiff was required to show cause why a professional negligence action arising from estate-related advice should not be dismissed for delay.
The court held that the plaintiff failed to provide an acceptable explanation for prolonged inactivity, repeated changes of counsel, and inconsistent litigation strategy across multiple related proceedings.
The court also found the plaintiff had not discharged the burden of showing the defendants would suffer no non-compensable prejudice if the action continued.
The action was dismissed under Rule 48.14, with costs left for further submissions if necessary.
