Dibble v. Jensen

129 So. 2d 162 (1961)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Dibble v. Jensen

Florida District Court of Appeal
129 So. 2d 162 (1961)

Facts

In 1954, Ruth Jensen (defendant) and Roy Dibble were involved in an automobile accident. At the time of the accident, Ruth was a resident of Florida and was married to Sid Jensen (defendant). However, as of 1957, Ruth divorced Sid and became a resident of New Jersey. In 1960, approximately six years after the accident, Dibble filed a civil complaint against the Jensens for damages caused by the accident. Ruth moved to dismiss, arguing that Dibble’s lawsuit was barred by the relevant four-year statute of limitations. The trial court dismissed Dibble’s action. Dibble appealed, arguing that dismissal was inappropriate because (1) Ruth’s absence from Florida tolled the statute of limitations; and (2) Ruth’s move to New Jersey meant that Dibble was unable to locate her to perfect service of process within four years of the accident. Sid was not subject to Dibble’s appeal.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 734,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 734,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 734,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership