EILEEN VENABLE, APPELLANT,
v.
GRANDEUR ARABIANS AND FLORIDA FARM BUREAU, APPELLEES
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.
Venable appeals a workers' compensation order, challenging the deputy commissioner's findings regarding bad faith and average weekly wage. The court reverses and remands because the deputy failed to provide adequate factual findings to support his conclusions, making appellate review impossible.
The court held that the deputy's findings were inadequate. An order must set forth findings of ultimate fact with sufficient particularity and detail to enable appellate courts to determine what facts were found and to review whether those findings are supported by legally sufficient substantial competent evidence.
[1] A workers' compensation order must set forth findings of ultimate fact necessary to determine the rights of the parties.
[2] Ultimate facts are those facts required for the determination of the rights of the parties to become a pure question of law.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“An order making an award shall set forth the findings of ultimate fact.”
Establishes the statutory requirement for detailed factual findings in workers' compensation orders.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceVenable filed a workers' compensation claim against Grandeur Arabians and Florida Farm Bureau. The deputy commissioner issued an order finding the emp…
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 Average Weekly Wage cases and more on FLexlaw
MILLS, Judge.
Venable appeals from a workers’ compensation order contending the deputy erred by failing to detail the factual basis for his findings regarding the employer/carrier’s bad faith and Venable’s average weekly wage. We agree. We do not reach two other issues raised by Venable because it is necessary that we reverse and remand this case for the deputy to make adequate findings of fact.
The deputy’s only findings of fact were (1)“I find that the employer/carrier is not guilty of bad faith,” and (2) “that the claimant’s average weekly wage was $183.33 plus $11.54 insurance and $74.41 per week housing and utilities or a total of $269.28 with a resulting compensation rate of $179.50.” The figure of $74.41 for housing and utilities was the only disputed part of the average weekly wage.
An order making an award shall set forth the findings of ultimate fact. Section 440.25(3)(c), F.S. (1981). Ultimate facts are all those facts necessary to be found in a given case in order that the determination of the rights of the parties shall become a pure question of law. Brown v. Griffin, 229 So. 2d 225 (Fla.1969).
The function of this court, insofar as examination of the evidence is concerned, is to ascertain whether there is substantial competent evidence legally sufficient to support the findings made by the deputy whose decision is under examination.
It is impossible for the court to intelligently apply this rule unless the facts are stated with sufficient particularity to enable the court to determine just what facts were found by the deputy and then review the evidence as to those findings of fact which it is claimed were not supported by legally sufficient substantial competent evidence.
Without such findings of fact, this court would be required to abandon the substantial competent evidence rule and either try the case de novo on the record, without having had the benefit of seeing and hearing the witnesses, or devise some other rule by which to measure the scope of this review of the evidence.
A deputy commissioner should resolve all conflicts in the evidence upon material matters and make specific findings of fact sufficient to clearly show the basis of the award.
The statement of facts should be clear and unambiguous and should be sufficiently definite and detailed to enable the reviewing authority to test the validity under the law of the decision resting upon those facts.
There is a total absence of findings of fact to support the deputy’s conclusions in the order before us. Without adequate findings of fact by the deputy, it is impossible for us to carry out our duties.
JOANOS and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
BEE GEE Shrimp, Inc. v. Petra Carreras, 516 So. 2d 1121 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…as had [*1123] been done with the initial claim and a prior order. It was also shown that the carrier probably precipitated the miscommunication by providing the Tampa address, as opposed to the Jacksonville address. . Venable v. Grandeur Arabians, 464 So. 2d 625, 626 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).…
-
Enedina Herrera v. Hojo INN Maingate & Armor Ins. Co., 680 So. 2d 439 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…anna v. Industrial Labor Serv., Inc., 636 So. 2d 773, 776 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Courtesy Corp. v. Holland, 538 So. 2d 545, 547 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Broadfoot v. Albert Hugo Ass’n, 478 So. 2d 863, 864 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Venable v. Grandeur Arabians, 464 So. 2d 625, 625-26 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Indeed, the workers’ compensation statute provides that “[t]he order making an award or rejecting the claim ... shall set forth the findings of ultimate facts....” § 440.25(3)(e), Fla.Stat. (1993). The inclusion of such…
-
Conshor, Inc. v. Roberts, 498 So. 2d 622 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…hat the standard of appellate review is simply to determine whether there is competent substantial evidence legally sufficient to support the findings made by the deputy commissioner whose decision is under examination. Venable v. Grandeur Arabians, 464 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). If the deputy commissioner’s findings are supported by competent substantial evidence, it is irrelevant that competent substantial evidence could also support a contrary finding. In the present case, the deputy commissioner’s d…
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
- Brown v. Joseph Griffin & the Fla. Indus. Comm'n, 229 So. 2d 225 (Fla. 1969)