MICHAEL FERGUSON, APPELLANT,

v.

ELNA ELECTRIC, INC., APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Byerley v. Citrus Publ'g, Inc., 725 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
  …tute. For example, an employee who has received workers’ compensation benefits is estopped from suing the employer in tort because the statute is the exclusive remedy for the employee if the injuries are job related. Ferguson v. Elna Electric, Inc., 421 So. 2d 805 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). We think it would be inequitable for an employer to deny worker’s compensation coverage on the ground that the employee’s injury did not arise out of the course and scope of employment, then later claim immunity from a tort suit…
• Tractor Supply Co. v. Kent, 966 So. 2d 978 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)
  …tute. For example, an employee who has received worker’s compensation benefits is estopped from suing the employer in tort because the statute is the exclusive remedy for the employee if the injuries are job related. Ferguson v. Elna Electric, Inc., 421 So. 2d 805 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). We think it would be inequitable for an employer to deny worker’s compensation coverage on the ground that the employee’s injury did not arise out of the course and scope of employment, then later claim immunity from a tort suit…
• Michael v. Centex-Rooney Constr. Co., Inc., 645 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
  …(Fla. 3d DCA 1984), rev. denied, 467 So. 2d 1000 (Fla.1985).1 The trial court’s decision in this ease is similar to the conclusion reached in a very short opinion by the third district based on an estoppel theory. See Ferguson v. Elna Elec., Inc., 421 So. 2d 805 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). The Ferguson court stated: “We affirm the summary judgment solely for the reason that appellant, having demanded and been paid workers’ compensation benefits, was es-topped to deny [in a tort action] that he was injured while in…

Authorities Cited

• Matthews v. G. S. P. Corp., 354 So. 2d 1243 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)