announced it would enter. Upon remand, the probate court may, in its discretion, consider the claimants’ motion for extension of time, taking such evidence and hearing arguments as it may deem appropriate. Unless the court, as a result thereof, finds good cause shown and grants the extension, it shall enter an order striking the claims of Martinez and Spencer. The probate court also ruled that Drake Capital’s timely filed demand for arbitration on its claim against the estate satisfied the “independent action” provision of the statute. Appellant contends here that the statute contemplates the filing of a civil action in a court of law and that an arbitration proceeding is not a civil action, citing as analogous Miele v. Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc., 656 So.2d 470, 472-73 (Fla.1995)(<HOLDING>). However, section 733.705(4) requires a
recognizing that the term expense may be used to define disbursements even though the term is used in accrual accounting holding that section 102 of the civil rights act of 1991 does not apply to preenactment conduct holding that arbitration is not a civil action as that term is used in section 76873 florida statutes 1991 holding that conduct prior to passage of the civil rights act of 1991 is admissible to provide context and background holding that section 89313 as amended by section 893101 florida statutes 2002 is constitutional