LAZARO RAUL PEREZ, APPELLANT,
v.
K-MART CORP., A FOREIGN CORPORATION, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida appellate court affirmed summary judgment dismissing employee's tort claim against employer, holding that Section 440.11 of the Workers' Compensation Statute provides the exclusive remedy and is constitutional.
Section 440.11 of the Florida Workers' Compensation Statute provides the exclusive remedy for employee injuries and is constitutional.
[1] The exclusive remedy provision of Section 440.11, Florida Statutes (1979), is constitutional and bars common law tort actions by employees against employers for work-rela…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Perez, an employee of K-Mart Corp., was injured during the course of his employment and sought to bring a cause of action against his employ…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Workers' Compensation Exclusive Remedy cases and more on FLexlaw
MELVIN, WOODROW M. (Ret.), Associate Judge.
Appellant, plaintiff in the trial court, seeks review of an adverse final summary judgment holding that Section 440.11, Florida Statutes (1979) bars his cause of action against his employer K-Mart Corp. On appeal the appellant challenges the constitutionality of the 1979 Workers’ Compensation Statute, more particularly Section 440.11 Florida Statutes (1979) which provides the exclusive remedy where an employee is injured during the course of his employment. The constitutionality of Chapter 440 Florida Statutes has been upheld in the past contrary to the appellant’s contentions. See Iglesia v. Floran, 394 So. 2d 994 (Fla. 1981); Favre v. Capeletti Brothers, Inc., 381 So. 2d 1356 (Fla. 1980); Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company v. Smith, 359 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 1978); Carr v. Central Florida Aluminium Products, Inc., 402 So. 2d 565 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). His further contention that the 1979 revision of Chapter 440 Florida Statutes, which reduced the benefits to injured employees, has rendered Chapter 440 Florida Statutes (1979) unconstitutional, we also find to be without merit. Cf., Chapman v. Dillon, 415 So. 2d 12 (Fla. 1982).
Based on the foregoing we fail to find error in the ruling of the trial court and the order appealed is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
FERGUSON, Judge
(specially concurring).
I concur because in order to resolve this dispute we need not consider those portions of Section 440.11, Florida Statutes (1979) which are of questionable constitutionality.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Regency INN v. Johnson, 422 So. 2d 870 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)…pman v. Dillon, 415 So. 2d 12 (Fla.1982); Lasky v. State Farm Insurance Company, 296 So. 2d 9 (Fla.1974); Kluger v. White, 281 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1973); Carr v. Central Florida Aluminum Products, 402 So. 2d 565 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Perez v. K-Mart Corp., 418 So. 2d 1052 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1982). We hold that the unavailability of jobs due to economic conditions does not preclude recovery of wage loss benefits, and, accordingly, it is not necessary for a wage loss claimant to present evidence that his refusal for employ…
Authorities Cited
- Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Smith, 359 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 1978)
- Chapman v. Dillon, 415 So. 2d 12 (Fla. 1982)
- Iglesia v. Floran, 394 So. 2d 994 (Fla. 1981)
- Dirk Allan Carr v. Cent. Fla. Aluminum Prods., Inc., 402 So. 2d 565 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- Favre v. Capeletti Bros., Inc., 381 So. 2d 1356 (Fla. 1980)