Kentucky

Senior Status Judge Lambert authored a decision which reversed and remanded the trial judge's dismissal for lack of prosecution for failure to make the required findings.  I can't say whether this published decision will mark a change in appellate attitude regarding these dismissals for lack of movement by one side or the other, but one might think depriving any party of their Constitutional rights to a jury trial for not moving the case forward is a harsh remedy which ignores the facts of the case.  Although it might be a little more work for the trial court in moving its own docket forward, I would like to think the courts would fall on the side of an opportunity to be heard.  Incredibly cumbersome to say the least, but requiring a trial date, following an opportunity to respond or take discovery,  would place the case in a posture for a dismissal, directed verdict, summary judgment etc which addresses the facts of the case rather than failure to prosecute. 

Here's the squib with link to full text:

Wildcat Property Management, LLC v. Reuss

2008-CA-002290 12/11/2009 2009 WL 4723203

Opinion by Senior Judge Lambert; Chief Judge Combs and Judge Moore concurred. The Court reversed and remanded an order of the circuit court dismissing an action with prejudice. The Court first held that because both CR 77.02(2) and the local housekeeping rule only provided for dismissal without prejudice, the dismissal with prejudice was, of necessity, pursuant to CR 41.02. However, the circuit court failed to properly exercise its discretion by failing to make the required findings as to why the case was dismissed.