BOB MOORE, APPELLANT,

v.

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, AND HOLIDAY INN, APPELLEES

Citator

Cited By

• Fisher v. Shenandoah Gen. Constr. Co., 498 So. 2d 882 (Fla. 1986)
  …dental. Clearly, the Workers’ Compensa [*886] tion Act does not affect rights which are not within the purview of the act or excluded from the act by necessary implication. American Freight System, Inc. v. Florida Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co., 453 So. 2d 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Thus, an employee may bring a common law action for intentional tort against his employer despite the exclusive remedy provision in the Workers’ Compensation Act. Other courts, both within Florida and throughout the nation, have…
• Byrd v. Richardson-Greenshields Sec., Inc., 552 So. 2d 1099 (Fla. 1989)
  …rs’ compensation generally is the sole tort remedy available to a worker injured in a manner that falls within the broad scope and policies of the workers’ compensation statute. American Freight System, Inc. v. Florida Farm Bureau Casualty Ins. Co., 453 So. 2d 468, 470 (Fla.2d DCA 1984). Indeed, section 440.11, Florida Statutes (1987), provides that workers’ compensation is the exclusive remedy and is “in place of all other liability of such employer ... on account of such injury or death.” This statute expre…
• Fla. Birth-Related Neurological Injury Comp. Ass'n v. Jaimes McKAUGHAN and Darlene McKaughan, 668 So. 2d 974 (Fla. 1996)
  …on Act, is a statutory substitute for common law rights and liabilities, it should be strictly construed to include only those subjects clearly embraced within its terms. See American Freight Sys. Inc. [v. Florida Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co.] 453 So. 2d 468 [ (Fla.App. 2d Dist.1984) ]. Thus, just as under the Workers’ Compensation At, a legal representative of an infant should be free to pursue common law remedies for damages resulting in an injury not encompassed within the express provisions of the P…