JOSEPH T. MELE, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
SUPERIOR PONTIAC GMC, INC. AND ADJUSTCO, INC., APPELLEES/CROSS-APPELLANTS
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 reversed an attorney fee award in a workers' compensation case because the deputy commissioner failed to evaluate all statutory factors required by Section 440.34(1)(a-h), Florida Statutes, despite finding the $22,500 fee itself reasonable.
An attorney fee award in workers' compensation must be reversed and remanded when the deputy commissioner fails to expressly evaluate and indicate how each statutory factor under Section 440.34(1)(a-h) was operative in determining the fee.
[1] Attorney fee awards in workers' compensation cases must expressly evaluate each statutory factor enumerated in Section 440.34(1)(a-h), Florida Statutes, and indicate how…
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 intelligence“All factors required under the statute and case law must be considered and evaluated expressly in the order awarding attorney fees.”
Court's statement of the legal requirement for attorney fee awards in workers' compensation cases.
Claimant Mele suffered a compensable back injury in May 1984 and obtained workers' compensation benefits through his attorney. The deputy commissioner…
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 Attorney'S Fees Dispute cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This cause is before us on appeal from an order of the deputy commissioner awarding claimant’s attorney a fee of $22,500 for services performed in obtaining workers’ compensation benefits arising from claim ant’s compensable back injury of May 1984. We do not find this fee unreasonable; however, we are constrained to remand the cause because the deputy, in his order, failed to evaluate the statutory factors enumerated in Section 440.34(l)(a-h), Florida Statutes, and to indicate how each factor was operative in determining the fee. Central Truck Line, Inc. v. Coleman, 458 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Aetna Maintenance Corporation v. LaBaff, 377 So. 2d 53 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).
The deputy stated in his order that his determination of attorney fees was based on the evidence, the provisions of Section 440.34, Florida Statutes, and the criteria enumerated in Lee Engineering & Construction Co. v. Fellows, 209 So. 2d 454 (Fla.1968). Although he specifically evaluated several of the factors in Section 440.34(1) in departing from the guideline fee, the deputy failed to determine the amount of benefits secured by claimant’s attorney and did not evaluate the factors of Sections 440.-34(l)(b), (c), (d), (e), and (f). All factors required under the statute and case law must be considered and evaluated expressly in the order awarding attorney fees.
Accordingly, the order is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedr ings consistent herewith.
BOOTH and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. ERVIN, J., concurs in result.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wheeler v. S. Fla. State Hosp. & State of Fla., 752 So. 2d 1285 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…findings on each of the statutory factors enumerated in section 440.34(1). See, e.g., Dobbs v. Suncoast Acoustics, 590 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); General Kinetics v. Butts, 586 So. 2d 1331 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Mele v. Superior Pontiac GMC, Inc., 536 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). In light of the decision in South Florida State Hospital v. Wheeler, 745 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), the appellee’s cross appeal is without merit. The order is reversed and this case is remanded for entry of an order wh…
Authorities Cited
- Gray v. Attorney Gen., State of Fla. and/or State Attorney, Cir. Court, Volusia Cnty., Fla., 209 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 1968)
- Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Bertram Craven, 458 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- AETNA Maint. Corp. & State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. la Baff, 377 So. 2d 53 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)