
    Richard FLANZBAUM et ux., Appellants, v. STANS LOUNGE et al., Appellees.
    No. 77-1162.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    Nov. 28, 1979.
    Michael I. Libman of Abramson, Men-digutia & Libman, P.A., Miami, for appellants.
    Joseph S. Kashi of Grimmett, Scherer & James, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellees.
   PER CURIAM.

This case was dismissed with prejudice for failure of the appellants to comply with pretrial discovery orders of the trial court. Our review of the record reveals that the appellants were in substantial compliance with the discovery orders entered and that any failure to comply was due more to the withdrawal of counsel and appellants’ subsequent difficulties in securing representation than to appellants’ deliberate refusal to comply. Although such circumstances may well justify the imposition of sanctions against the appellants or their counsel, or both, we do not believe the drastic punishment of dismissal with prejudice was justified. Swindle v. Reid, 242 So.2d 751 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970). Accordingly, this cause is reversed and remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith.

ANSTEAD and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.

DOWNEY, Chief Judge, dissents, with opinion.

DOWNEY, Chief Judge,

dissenting:

Certainly the sanctions imposed by the trial judge are drastic. However, the record supports the imposition of sanctions and I fail to find any demonstration of an abuse of discretion. Thus, I would affirm the order appealed from.  