Important Recent Case Law for Florida

Thursday, May 1, 2014 | 0

NEW! Stephens v. Mid-Continent Casualty Co., 13-10170 and 13-15741, (04/24/2014): A federal appellate court ruled that the commercial general liability carrier for the contractor on a construction project had no duty to indemnify the contractor for the tort claim brought by the estate of a worker who died while working on the project.

NEW! Taylor v. Air Canada, 1D13-4765, (04/25/2014): A Florida appellate court reversed a judge's denial of a worker's claim for an advance of compensation to cover the cost of deposing her personal physician.

NEW! Lord v. Santa Rosa Correctional Institute, 1D13-3249, (04/24/2014): Florida's 1st District Court of Appeal ruled that a worker's attorney was entitled to an additional fee which encompassed all of the work done to get the worker's employer to authorize a new primary treating physician. 

NEW! Energy Air v. Lalonde, 1D13-5213, (04/24/2014): The 1st District Court of Appeal of Florida upheld an award of benefits to a worker for his heat-exposure injury, saying that his employer was challenging the award based on an obsolete causation standard. 

NEW! McIntosh v. CVS Pharmacy, 1D13-2397, (04/22/2014): A Florida appellate court has revived a pharmacist's claim for benefits based on her post-traumatic stress disorder from a 2010 robbery that occurred while she was six months pregnant. 

NEW! Sarasota County School Board v. Roberson, 1D13-4087, (04/16/2014): The Florida 1st District Court of Appeal ruled that a worker's psychiatric limitations from a mental health condition that is causally related to a physical industrial injury can be considered in conjunction with the worker's physical limitations in deciding whether she is permanently and totally disabled.

NEW! Southeast Milk v. Fisher, 1D13-4411, (04/14/2014): A Florida appellate court reversed an award of temporary partial disability benefits to an employee who was fired for violating his employer's attendance policy by failing to call in before missing work.

NEW! Royal Caribbean Cruises v. Cox, 3D09-2712, (04/09/2014): The en banc 3rd District Court of Appeal on Wednesday receded from its prior case law allowing a claimant to receive an attorney fee award in an admiralty case, pursuant to Florida's fee-shifting statutes.

NEW! Hamm v. PMI Employee Leasing, 1D13-4895, (04/07/2014): Florida's 1st District Court of Appeal overturned a judge's decision denying death benefits to the biological daughter of a worker who died after being crushed by a pin machine at a bowling alley, saying the judge's determination of who qualified as a dependent of the worker had been premature, as the worker's employer had requested the ruling before any person had filed a request for death benefits. 

NEW! Neville v. J.C. Penney Corp., 1D13-5156, (04/02/2014): The 1st District Court of Appeal threw out a fee award to an injured worker based on the trial judge's failure to explain why she had based the award on a lower number of hours of work than the worker's attorney had claimed to have dedicated to the case. 

NEW! Cabrera v. Outdoor Empire Inc., 1D13-5235, (03/27/2014): The 1st District Court of Appeal rejected a worker's claim that he had not intended to settle his potential entitlement to benefits from two alleged dates of injury when he – with the assistance of counsel – agreed to a settlement with his employer in exchange for the payment of $165,000.

NEW! Alachua County School Board v. Department of Financial Services, 1D13-1841, (03/27/2014): The 1st District Court of Appeals ruled that the Department of Financial Services can resolve disputes by an audited entity regarding the assessment of penalties based on its noncompliance with the workers' compensation statutes without referring the dispute to a judge of compensation claims if the audited entity is not challenging the amount of the penalty assessment, but only whether the violation had occurred.

NEW! Jones v. Shadow Trailers, 1D13-4168, (03/18/2014): An injured worker was not entitled to an award of attorney fees based on his successful petition for medical benefits, the 1st District Court of Appeal ruled.