WENDY DAWN BLACKBURN FOR LLOYD E. BLACKBURN (DECEASED), APPELLANT,
v.
DAVID TAYLOR AND ARROW TRUCKING & LAND DEV., INC. AND LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO., 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.
Wendy Dawn Blackburn appealed the denial of worker's compensation death benefits for her deceased husband Lloyd E. Blackburn. The court reversed the Judge of Compensation Claims' decision, finding that Blackburn presented sufficient evidence of substantial financial dependency and justifiable cause for living apart, qualifying her as a surviving spouse under Florida law.
Blackburn met her burden of proof by competent substantial evidence. Although meager, evidence of her class and position in life, accustomed mode of living, the decedent's actual contributions, and her reliance upon those contributions support a finding that she was substantially financially dependent upon the decedent and lived apart for justifiable cause. Therefore, she qualifies as a surviving spouse under Chapter 440 and is entitled to death benefits.
[1] When all testimony is submitted by deposition, an appellate court is in as good a position as the trial court to evaluate witness credibility and weigh the evidence.
[2] To recover worker's compensation death benefits as a spouse living apart from the decedent, the claimant must establish by competent substantial evidence substantial fina…
Previewing 2 of 4 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 testimony adduced before the JCC was submitted by deposition. This court is therefore in as good a position to evaluate the credibility of witnesses and weigh the evidence as the JCC.”
Establishes the appellate court's standard of review when reviewing depositions rather than live testimony, allowing de novo evaluation of credibility and evidence.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWendy Dawn Blackburn sought worker's compensation death benefits as the surviving spouse of Lloyd E. Blackburn. The Judge of Compensation Claims denie…
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 Dependency For Support cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Wendy Dawn Blackburn contests an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) denying worker’s compensation death benefits. The JCC found that she failed to establish by competent substantial evidence that she was living apart from the claimant for justifiable cause, and that she was substantially financially dependent upon him for support at the time of his death. Blackburn argues on appeal that she met her evidentiary burden, and that the JCC erred in rejecting her testimony for lack of credibility absent an adequate explanation for such a finding. We agree and reverse.
All testimony adduced before the JCC was submitted by deposition. This court is therefore in as good a position to evaluate the credibility of witnesses and weigh the evidence as the JCC. See, e.g., Mendivil v. Tampa Envelope Manufacturing Co., 233 So. 2d 5, 6 (Fla.1970); Lerman v. Broward Cty. Bd. of Com’rs, 555 So. 2d 419, 425 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Sanlando Utility Corp. v. Morris, 418 So. 2d 389, 391 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Haga v. Clay Hyder Trucking Lines, 397 So. 2d 428, 431 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 402 So. 2d 609 (Fla.1981); Morrison Merchandising Corp. v. Rambeau, 377 So. 2d 234, 236 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); cert. denied, 386 So. 2d 640 (Fla.1980). Our review of the record clearly shows that the claimant met her burden of proof by competent substantial evidence.
Section 440.16(l)(b), Fla.Stat. (1987) allows for the payment of death benefits to “the following persons ... on account of dependency upon the deceased, and in the following order of preference ...: (1) To the spouse if there is no child, 50 percent of the average weekly wage, such compensation to cease upon the spouse’s death or remarriage_” (Emphasis Supplied). Spouse is defined as “only a spouse ... substantially dependent upon the decedent for financial support and living apart at [the time of the decedent’s death or injury] for justifiable cause.” Section 440.02(19), Florida Statutes (1988 Supp.). Therefore, before a spouse living apart may recover dependency benefits, such spouse must produce competent evidence of substantial dependence on the decedent for financial support, and justifiable cause for any physical separation at the time of death.
Although meager, Blackburn’s class and position in life, her accustomed mode of living, the decedent’s actual contributions and her reliance upon those contributions support a finding that she was substantially financially dependent upon the decedent, and lived apart from him at the time of his death for justifiable cause. See Wise v. E.L. Copeland Bldrs., 435 So. 2d 339, 341, 342 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). There is no competent substantial evidence to the contrary. Thus, we find that Blackburn is a surviving spouse within the meaning of Chapter 440, and the JCC erred in denying the claim for worker's compensation death benefits. We reverse and remand for an award of such benefits.
The order appealed from is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
SHIVERS, C.J., and JOANOS and MINER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hall v. Maal, 32 So. 3d 682 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…evaluated by the Legislature, and not decided by the judiciary. A valid marriage affects confidential spousal communications, wrongful death, workers’ compensation claims, and social security benefits. See, e.g., Blackburn for Blackburn v. Taylor, 566 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (holding that claimant was a surviving spouse of the deceased and thus entitled to workers’ compensation death benefits); Yokie v. State, 773 So. 2d 115 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (holding that defendant’s conversation with his spouse w…
-
Morales v. Zenith Ins. Co., 152 So. 3d 557 (Fla. 2014)…employee’s death that is due to the employee’s statutory beneficiaries, including the spouse and children. See § 440.16, Fla. Stat. Surviving spouses, like Ms. Morales, may make a claim for the available statutory benefits. See Blackburn v. Taylor, 566 So. 2d 915, 916 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (recognizing that a “surviving spouse” of a deceased employee is entitled to claim workers’ compensation benefits). Further, [*565] the Workers’ Compensation Law allows a claimant who is represented by counsel, as Ms. Morale…
-
Stewart v. Tampa Maid SEA Prods. & Watkins Assocs., Inc., 638 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…AHN, JJ., concur. . This court is on equal footing with the judge of compensation claims in evaluating and weighing medical testimony given by deposition. Hubbell v. Triple J of Lee County, 590 So. 2d 1084 (Fla. 1st DCA1992); Blackburn v. Taylor, 566 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 577 So. 2d 1329 (Fla.1990); Hidden Harbor Boatworks v. Williams, 566 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 1st DCA1990).…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Haga v. Clay Hyder Trucking Lines, 397 So. 2d 428 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- Sanlando Util. Corp. & U. S. Fid. & Guar. Co. v. Morris, 418 So. 2d 389 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Betty v. Mendivil, 233 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 1970)
- Lerman v. Broward Cnty. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs & Risk Mgmt. Div., 555 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- State v. Andrews, 377 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Carrington Wise v. E.L. Copeland Builders & Aetna Life & Cas. Co., 435 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)