ROOSEVELT U. PAULK, PETITIONER,
v.
PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD AND CRAWFORD & COMPANY, 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.
The court held that prejudgment interest does not accrue on attorney's fees authorized by the Workers' Compensation Law from the date entitlement is determined if the amount has not yet been established.
The case involves a certified question from the First District Court of Appeal regarding prejudgment interest on attorney's fees in a workers' compens…
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 Prejudgment Interest cases and more on FLexlaw
WELLS, Judge.
We have for review Palm Beach County School Board v. Paulk, 705 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), certifying the following question to be of great public importance:
Does the court’s decision in Quality Engineered Installation, Inc. v. Higley South, Inc., 670 So. 2d 929 (Fla.1996), extend to permit the accrual of prejudgment interest on attorney’s fees, authorized pursuant to the Workers’ Compensation Law, from the date entitlement to the fee is determined, when an amount for same has not yet been established?
Paulk, 705 So. 2d at 37. We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(4), Florida Constitution.
In Lee v. Wells Fargo Armored Services, 707 So. 2d 700 (Fla.1998), we answered this question in the negative and approved the decision of the First District Court of Appeal below. Accordingly, consistent with Lee, we approve Paulk and remand for further proceedings.
It is so ordered.
KOGAN, C.J., OVERTON, SHAW, HARDING and ANSTEAD, JJ., and GRIMES, Senior Justice, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re Amendment TO Fla. Rules OF Crim. Procedure-Rule 3.112 Minimum Standards FOR Attorneys IN Cap. Cases, 759 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 1999)…appointed to represent indigent defendants in capital cases where the services of the public defender are not available. In 1998 we deferred consideration of this issue pending legislative study. See In re Amendment to Fla. Rules of Judicial Admin., 711 So. 2d 1148, 1149-50 (Fla.1998). We now address the issue after receipt of a unanimous recommendation by a legislative study commission that this Court, rather than the legislature, adopt standards for lawyers in capital cases.2 Today we take an important step…
-
In re AMENDMENT TO FLA. RULES OF CRIM. PROCEDURE-RULE 3.112 MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR ATTORNEYS IN CAP. CASES, 820 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 2002)…n the proposals. In 1998, the Court deferred consideration of the proposed • standards pending legislative study of the issue. See In re Amendment to Fla. Rules■ of Judicial Admin. — Minimum Standards for Appoint [*186] ed Counsel in Capital Cases, 711 So. 2d 1148 (Fla.1998). After unanimous recommendation by a legislative study commission that this Court, rather than the Legislature, adopt standards for lawyers in capital cases, the Court resumed consideration of the matter. See In re Amendment to Fla. Rules…
Authorities Cited
- Quality Engineered Installation, Inc. v. Higley S., Inc., 670 So. 2d 929 (Fla. 1996)
- LEE v. Wells Fargo Armored Servs. & Travelers Ins. Co., 707 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 1998)
- Palm Beach Cnty. Sch. Bd. & F.A. Richard v. Paulk, 705 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)