GEORGE BURKE, APPELLANT,
v.
CHARLES B. ESHER, INC., APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the summary judgment below upon a holding that where a subcontractor of one of two joint venturer general contractors has secured a workers’ compensation insurance policy under which the subcontractor’s employee has been compensated for work related injuries, the employee cannot maintain an independent action to recover for these injuries against either of the joint venturer general contractors. § 440.11, Fla.Stat. (1975). Cf. Wilson v. Sirkin Building Corporation, 336 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976) (injured employee of joint venture covered under workers’ compensation insurance policy secured by one joint venturer cannot maintain independent tort action to recover for such injuries against the other joint venturer).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Austin v. The Duval Cnty. Sch. Bd., 657 So. 2d 945 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)…employee of a joint venture covered by a worker’s compensation insurance policy secured by one joint venturer cannot maintain an independent tort action to recover for such injuries against the other joint venturer. Burke v. Charles B. Esher, Inc., 397 So. 2d 439 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Wilson v. Sirkin Building Corp., 336 So. 2d 462, 463 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). In addition to the general elements of a contract, for a joint venture, there must be: (1) a community of interest in the performance of a common purpose,…
-
State v. D. B. C., 413 So. 2d 455 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)…s determination also is necessary for resolution of the second issue raised on appeal — the propriety of the trial court’s holding that the speedy trial [*457] period had run under Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.180(a).1 In D. L. M. v. State, 397 So. 2d 439 (Fla.3d DCA 1981), the court noted that the juvenile speedy trial rule has evolved from its adult counterpart, Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191, and that interpretations under the latter are proper guides in determining the meaning of the wo…
-
State v. M.S.S., 436 So. 2d 1067 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)…ring without demand within ninety days of the earlier date: either when the child was “taken into custody;” or the date on which the petition was filed. The rule does not include a definition for the phrase “taken into custody.” In D.L.M. v. State, 397 So. 2d 439 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), the police caught a nine year old boy on May 2, 1979, after he emerged from a house that had been burglarized. He was taken back to the house where a witness identified him. He was then permitted to return to his parents, and he…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Wilson v. Sirkin Bldg. Corp., 336 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)