PIZZA HUT OF AMERICA, INC., PETITIONER,
v.
RICHARD MILLER, ETC., ET AL., RESPONDENTS
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.
An appellate court lacks jurisdiction to review a non-final order denying a motion for summary judgment asserting worker's compensation immunity unless the order conclusively determines nonentitlement.
The district court found it lacked jurisdiction to review a trial court's denial of Pizza Hut's motion for summary judgment based on worker's compensa…
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 Worker'S Compensation Immunity cases and more on FLexlaw
OVERTON, Justice.
We have for review Pizza Hut of America, Inc. v. Miller, 674 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996), which conflicts with Breakers Palm Beach, Inc. v. Gloger, 646 So. 2d 237 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. In the instant case, the district court found that it was without jurisdiction to decide whether the trial court erred in denying Pizza Hut’s motion for summary judgment on the basis of worker’s compensation immunity. The trial court’s order specifically stated that there were factual questions on the issue of worker’s compensation immunity left for the jury and, consequently, no conclusive determination of nonentitlement to such immunity was made.
In Hastings v. Demming, 694 So. 2d 718 (Fla.1997), we held that an appellate court, under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(vi), does not have jurisdiction to review a non-final order denying a motion for summary judgment asserting worker’s compensation immunity unless the order conclusively and finally determines a party’s nonentitlement to such immunity.. Accordingly, we approve the decision of the district court in the instant case.
It is so ordered.
KOGAN, C.J., and SHAW, GRIMES, HARDING, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Reeves v. Fleetwood Homes OF Fla., Inc., 889 So. 2d 812 (Fla. 2004)…n under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(vi) to review the order. Id. at 768-69 (quoting Hastings, 694 So. 2d at 720). Accordingly, this Court approved the decision of the district court. See also Pizza Hut of Am., Inc. v. Miller, 696 So. 2d 340, 341 (Fla.1997) (holding no jurisdiction where trial court’s order specifically stated there were factual questions on the issue of workers’ compensation immunity and did not determine nonentitlement to work [*821] ers’ compensation immunity as a ma…
-
Martin Elecs., Inc. v. Glombowski, 705 So. 2d 26 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)…o dismiss. . The bright line interpretation is further supported by the supreme court’s decisions in H.C. Hodges Cash & Carry, Inc. v. Walton Dodge Chrysler-Plymouth Jeep & Eagle, 696 So. 2d 762 (Fla.1997), and Pizza Hut of America, Inc. v. Miller, 696 So. 2d 340 (Fla.1997). In H.C. Hodges, the supreme court specifically ruled that the district court’s determination of appealability based on their review of the record which conclusively demonstrated that there were no issues [*31] of material fact was in con…
-
Wheeled Coach Indus., Inc. v. Annulis, 852 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…equent case, the court characterized the rule another way: that there is no jurisdiction to review such an order unless that order “conclusively and finally determines a party’s nonentitlement to such immunity.” Pizza Hut of America, Inc. v. Miller, 696 So. 2d 340, 341 (Fla.1997). After reviewing the order, we conclude that the order finally and conclusively determines that WCI cannot claim workers’ compensation immunity. The operative facts are un-controverted. Annulis did not file a claim for workers’ comp…
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
- Hastings v. Demming, 694 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 1997)
- The Breakers Palm Beach, Inc. v. Gloger, 646 So. 2d 237 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- Pizza HUT OF Am., Inc. v. Miller, 674 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)