HELEN ROBBINS, APPELLANT,
v.
ROPHIE SHOES, INC. AND ALBERT ROPHIE, D/B/A FAMILY SHOE BOX, APPELLEES
MILLS, Judge.
Claimant appeals from a workers’ compensation order dismissing her claim because Section 440.15(3)(b)3d, Florida Statutes (1981), bars the payment of wage loss benefits to an employee who has reached the age of 65 and becomes eligible for social security benefits. We affirm.
Claimant contends Section 440.15(3)(b)3d, Florida Statutes (1981), is unconstitutional. We decline to rule on this issue because claimant lacks standing to challenge the constitutionality of the Section. The record in this case is devoid of evidence showing that claimant is entitled to wage loss benefits. See Eckerd Corp. v. Coker, 411 So. 2d 1026, 1982.
LARRY G. SMITH and SHAW, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fred v. Sasso, 431 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…ssaulting the wage-loss statute, section 440.15(3)(a) and (b), as unconstitutional. See Acosta v. Kraco, Inc., 426 So. 2d 1120 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Acton v. Ft. Lauderdale Hospital, 418 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Robbins v. Rophie Shoes, Inc., 413 So. 2d 839 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); and Jack Eckerd Corp. v. Coker, 411 So. 2d 1026 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Acosta, for example, is clearly distinguishable from the case sub judice in that in Acosta the deputy made no determination — as here — that claimant would be…
-
Se. Volusia Hosp. Dist. v. State, 432 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…and directly affected” by the operation of the statute. E.M. Watkins & Co., Inc. v. Board of Regents, 414 So. 2d 583, 588 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). See also Rhaney v. Dobbs House, Inc., 415 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Robbins v. Rophie Shoes, Inc., 413 So. 2d 839 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Jack Eckerd Corporation v. Coker, 411 So. 2d 1026 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Miami Beach Kennel Club, Inc. v. Board of Business Regulation, 265 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972). It is without question that appellants are. directly financ…
-
Acosta v. Kraco, Inc., 426 So. 2d 1120 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…ts but for the provisions of § 440.15(3)(b)3.d. The claimant has no standing to raise the constitutionality of the statute since he failed to prove that but for the statute he would be eligible for wage loss benefits. Robbins v. Rophie Shoes, Inc., 413 So. 2d 839 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. SHIVERS, J., concurs. ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C.J., dissents without opinion.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Jack Eckerd Corp. & Travelers Ins. Co. v. Coker, 411 So. 2d 1026 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)