JOHN F. BREEN, APPELLANT,
v.
DIANA K. SMITH, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1994-10-28
No. 93-1939
BOOTH, ALLEN and BENTON, JJ., concur.
644 So. 2d 183 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1994) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

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

In this workers' compensation appeal, the court held that a successor judge of compensation claims lacked jurisdiction to correct a scrivener's error in the original judge's final order more than one year after the order became final. The court reversed the successor judge's corrected order and reinstated the original order.


Holding

The successor JCC lacked jurisdiction to vacate, amend, or correct clerical errors in the original final order because the order had become final and was not appealed. A JCC only retains jurisdiction to correct clerical errors if an order is appealed before becoming final or if correction is made before the order becomes final.


Headnotes

[1] A judge of compensation claims lacks jurisdiction to amend or vacate a final order after it has become final by operation of law, absent specific statutory or rule author…

[2] A motion to correct a scrivener's error in a workers' compensation order filed after the order has become final does not confer jurisdiction on a successor judge to modif…

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

“Because the original JCC's final order was not appealed before it became final, neither the original nor the successor JCC retained jurisdiction to vacate, amend, or correct clerical errors therein.”

Establishes the core holding that lack of appeal before finality divests the JCC of jurisdiction to correct errors.

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

The original judge of compensation claims (JCC) issued a final order awarding benefits to Smith in a workers' compensation case. Over a year after thi…

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
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This workers’ compensation cause is before us on appeal from an order of a successor judge of compensation claims (JCC) correcting the original JCC’s final order awarding benefits to appellee Smith. Over a year after the original JCC’s final order became final by operation of section 440.25(4)(a), Florida Statutes (1991),1 Smith filed a motion to correct scrivener’s error on April 20,1993, asserting that Breen, as the owner of X-tra Pizza, was also Smith’s employer, and requesting that references to Breen as “owner” in the final order be corrected to read “owner/employer.” A successor JCC2 held a hearing on Smith’s motion and shortly thereafter issued a corrected final order identifying Breen as “owner/employer.”

Because the original JCC’s final order was not appealed before it became final, neither the original nor the successor JCC retained jurisdiction to vacate, amend, or correct clerical errors therein. See Fla.R.Work. Comp.P. 4.141(b) (providing that at the JCC’s discretion, an order not yet final by operation of section 440.25, Florida Statutes, may be either vacated or amended at either the JCC’s own initiative or pursuant to a motion for rehearing); Fla.R.Work.Comp.P. 4.141(c), 4.160(h)(3), and 4.165(g) (providing that if an order is appealed before becoming final, the JCC retains jurisdiction to correct clerical errors at any time before the record is filed with the district court); see also Polk County Board of County Commissioners v. Patterson, 433 So. 2d 1298, 1299 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (affirming deputy commissioner’s assessment of attorney fees, holding that “[i]f the deputy’s ruling upon that issue was unintended by the parties, or was otherwise inadvertent, that oversight might and should have been brought to the deputy’s attention within 30 days after the order was mailed, before it became final” under section 440.25(4)(a)); Stone & Webster v. McCray, 377 So. 2d 30, 31 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979) (quashing judge of industrial claim’s order vacating and republishing prior order, holding that “[t]he earlier order had become final and the judge was without jurisdiction to amend, vacate, or republish it.”).

Moreover, we cannot construe the successor JCC’s correction to have been a modification under section 440.28, Florida Statutes (1991). By its very terms, Smith’s motion to correct scrivener’s error merely requested the correction of a clerical mistake; it did not allege a change in condition or mistake in a determination of fact required by section 440.28.

Absent any statutory or rule authority to do so, the successor JCC in the present case did not have jurisdiction to correct the original JCC’s final order pursuant to Smith’s motion to correct scrivener’s error filed over one year after the original final order became final under section 440.25(4)(2). We therefore reverse the successor JCC’s corrected final order, and remand with directions that the original JCC’s final order be reinstated.

REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS.

BOOTH, ALLEN and BENTON, JJ., concur. . Section 440.25(4)(a), Florida Statutes (1991), provides in Ml:

Beginning on October 1, 1979, procedures with respect to appeals from orders of judges of compensation claims shall be governed by rules adopted by the Supreme Court. Such an order shall become final 30 days after mailing of copies of such order to the parties, unless appealed pursuant to such rules.

. The record does not reveal when, why, or how this case was transferred from the original JCC to the successor JCC.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • …n addition, a number of subsequent cases from this court have held, consistent with Farrell, that absent statutory or rule authority, a JCC, or the equivalent, does not have jurisdiction to vacate an order that has become final.3 See Breen v. Smith, 644 So. 2d 183 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Dowd v. Sunr-Crete Construction Co., 582 So. 2d 83 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Stone & Webster Engineering Co. v. McCray, 377 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). See also E.M. Scott Contractors v. Baker, 479 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw