THOMAS CARTIER, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1991-09-10
No. 91-336
Before FERGUSON, JORGENSON and GERSTEN, JJ.
594 So. 2d 755 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1991) Negative Treatment
Cited by 8 cases

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.

Synopsis

Thomas Cartier, an employee of an independent contractor hired by Florida Power & Light Company, was injured at FPL's power plant. FPL provided workers' compensation coverage pursuant to its contract with the contractor and claimed immunity from Cartier's negligence suit under Florida's workers' compensation statute. The court affirmed summary judgment for FPL, holding that FPL satisfied all requirements for immunity under section 440.11.


Holding

FPL is immune from Cartier's negligence suit under section 440.11 of the Florida Statutes because FPL satisfied all three requirements for immunity: (1) FPL had a contractual legal obligation to provide workers' compensation coverage at the time of the injury; (2) FPL in fact provided adequate coverage; and (3) the work was performed on FPL's property.


Headnotes

[1] A self-insured utility is immune from a negligence suit by an employee of an independent contractor if the utility was legally obligated to provide workers' compensation…

[2] A contractual obligation to provide workers' compensation coverage that arises before an accident satisfies the legal obligation prong for immunity under the workers' com…

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

Key Quotes

“Section 440.11, and its preamble, requires that in order to gain immunity, a) the self-insured public utility must be legally obligated to provide insurance coverage; b) it must in fact provide adequate coverage; and c) the work performed must be on or adjacent to the utility's property.”

Establishes the three-part test for workers' compensation immunity under Florida law.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

FPL, a self-insured utility, hired an independent contractor to perform work at its power plant. Cartier was employed by the independent contractor. T…

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.


Opinion of the Court
GERSTEN, Judge.

GERSTEN, Judge.

Appellant, Thomas Cartier (Cartier), appeals a final summary judgment in favor of appellee, Florida Power & Light Company (FPL). We affirm.

FPL is a self-insured utility, providing its own workers’ compensation insurance. FPL hired an independent contractor to perform work at one of its power plants. Cartier was an employee of the independent contractor. The contract between FPL and the independent contractor required FPL to provide workers’ compensation coverage for the independent contractor’s employees under FPL’s self-insurance program. After the contract was executed, Cartier was injured during his regular employment at the power plant. FPL, pursuant to its contractual duty, provided workers’ compensation benefits for Cartier. Cartier later sued FPL for negligence. FPL claimed immunity as the provider of workers’ compensation to Cartier. Cartier contends that although FPL provided workers’ compensation insurance, it is still liable for negligence as the owner of the power plant. FPL asserts that it is immune from Cartier’s tort action because it provided workers’ compensation coverage, as a self-insured utility, under section 440.571, Florida Statutes (1989).

Section 440.571 is a self-insurance provision in the workers’ compensation statute. This section authorizes self-insuring utilities to provide coverage for employees of subcontractors. It facilitates utilities’ compliance with the requirements of the immunity provision of the workers’ compensa tion statute. Section 440.11, Fla.Stat., (1989).

Section 440.11, and its preamble, requires that in order to gain immunity, a) the self-insured public utility must be legally obligated to provide insurance coverage; b) it must in fact provide adequate coverage; and c) the work performed must be on or adjacent to the utility’s property. Thus, if at the time of the accident: a) FPL had a contractual obligation to provide coverage; b) if it did provide coverage; and c) if the work was done on FPL’s property, then section 440.11 provides immunity from negligence suits.

We distinguish Florida Power & Light Company v. Huwer, 508 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Florida Power & Light Co. v. Huwer also involved a tort claim arising from an injury of an employee of a subcontractor at a power plant. After the injury occurred, FPL agreed to provide workers’ compensation for Huwer. In Huwer, this court held that “FPL is not entitled ... to the workers’ compensation exclusivity defense by virtue of its payment of workers’ compensation benefits to Huwer....” Florida Power & Light Co. v. Huwer, 508 So. 2d at 490.

In Florida Power & Light Co. v. Huwer, FPL had no legal duty to provide coverage before or at the time of the accident, although it did provide coverage in fact after the accident. Accordingly, in Huwer, FPL did not meet the prong of 440.11 which requires a legal duty to provide coverage at the time of the accident.

Here, we find that Cartier’s injury occurred during his regular employment on FPL’s premises. We also find that FPL assumed a contractual duty to provide coverage before any accident, and in fact provided such coverage at the time of the accident. Thus, because FPL met all prongs of section 440.11, Cartier is foreclosed from a tort action against FPL.

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Robbins v. Fla. Power & Light Co., 629 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed on the authority of Cartier v. Florida Power & Light Co., 594 So. 2d 755 (Fla. 3d DCA1991), review denied, 602 So. 2d 941 (Fla.1992).…
  • Ottis Lee Deen, Jr. v. Quantum Res., Inc., 750 So. 2d 616 (Fla. 1999)
    …loyee it had provided to the job was a “borrowed servant” of FP & L and that it therefore enjoyed the protection of FP & L’s immunity from suit. The trial court granted the motions for summary judgment based on [Cartier v. Florida Power & Light Co., 594 So. 2d 755 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) ]. Deen, 713 So. 2d at 1076 (Patterson, J., dissenting). The Second District majority cited Cartier, affirmed without analysis the summary judgments of the trial court, and certified the question to this Court. Deen, 713 So. 2d…
  • Ottis Lee Deen, Jr. v. Quantum Res., Inc., 713 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Cartier v. Florida Power & Light Co., 594 So. 2d 755 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). However, we certify the following question to the Florida Supreme Court: DOES A SELF-INSURED PUBLIC UTILITY WHICH UNDERTAKES, PURSUANT TO SECTION 440.571, FLORIDA STATUTES (1991)(NOW SECTION 624.46225, FLORIDA STATUTES (1997)),…
    1 / 2

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw