CHARLES N. SILVERS, APPELLANT,
v.
TIMOTHY J. O'DONNELL CORP., A/K/A O'DONNELL CORP., ETC., APPELLEE
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.
Charles Silvers appealed a directed verdict in favor of his former employer, Timothy J. O'Donnell Corporation, on his claim that he was terminated in violation of Florida's workers' compensation anti-retaliation statute. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed, finding sufficient circumstantial evidence of the employer's knowledge of the workers' compensation claim and improper exclusion of corroborating evidence from other terminated employees.
The court reversed the directed verdict, holding that Silvers presented sufficient circumstantial evidence to permit jury consideration of whether the employer knew of his workers' compensation claim at the time of termination, and that the trial court erred in summarily excluding testimony from other employees fired under similar circumstances after filing workers' compensation claims.
[1] An employee establishes a prima facie case for retaliatory discharge under section 440.205, Fla. …
[2] Evidence of an employer's knowledge of an employee's injury and referral for medical care is sufficient to support an inference that the employer was aware the employee w…
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“No employer shall discharge, threaten to discharge, intimidate or coerce any employee by reason of such employee's valid claim for compensation or attempt to claim compensation under [this law].”
The statutory provision under which Silvers brought his claim, establishing the legal standard for unlawful retaliation.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSilvers suffered a work injury on December 12th and called in sick the next day. On December 14th, he went to the employer's office and was referred 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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Workers' Compensation Retaliation cases and more on FLexlaw
Silvers appeals from a final judgment in favor of Timothy J. O’Donnell Corporation, based on a directed verdict entered at the close of the Silvers’ case at trial. The trial court ruled that Silvers had “offered no evidence of O’Donnell’s motivation or timing of the decision to terminate Plaintiff relative to his filing a workers compensation claim.” Silvers brought suit against O’Donnell for violation of section 440.205, Fla. Stat., which provides:
No employer shall discharge, threaten to discharge, intimidate or coerce any employee by reason of such employee’s valid claim for compensation or attempt to claim compensation under [this law].
We reverse.
We think that, although it was minimal and largely circumstantial, Silvers presented sufficient evidence to merit submission to the jury that his employer and supervisors knew that he was applying for workers compensation when they fired him. At the time he was terminated they were aware of his injury suffered on December 12th, for which he called in sick on December 13th. Because O’Donnell Corporation was a small business, the inference is available that Silvers’ supervisor and the business owner were aware that on December 14th, when he came to their business office, he was referred to Central Care for medical care and was in the process of seeking compensation coverage. At noon, when he returned with a work release and showed it to his supervisor, he was fired, allegedly for being late on previous occasions. The reason for his discharge was disputed in the record.
In addition, it appears that at least three other employees of O’Donnell had allegedly been fired for bogus reasons after they filed claims for workers compensation. The substance of their testimonies is in the record in the form of affidavits, and they were listed as witnesses. However, the trial court ruled summarily that they would not be permitted to testify. We think this was error. Similar firings under similar circumstances would be extremely relevant to this case. See Duckworth v. Ford, 83 F. 3d 999 (8th Cir.1996); Hawkins v. Hennepin Technical Center, 900 F. 2d 153 (8th Cir.), cert. denied 498 U.S. 854, 111 S.Ct. 150, 112 L.Ed.2d 116 (1990); Kunzman v. Enron Corp., 941 F.Supp. 853 (N.D.Iowa 1996).
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
DAUKSCH and COBB, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bruner v. GC-GW, Inc., 880 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…dence of causation. Therefore, this decision does not address the sufficiency of indirect evidence which may entitle a plaintiff to have his case decided by a jury, nor do I necessarily concur in the holding of Silvers v. Timothy J. O’Donnell Corp., 751 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), as characterized by Judge Kahn in the dissent.…1 / 2
-
Girardo Baca Flores v. Roof Tile Admin., Inc., 887 So. 2d 360 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)…106 L.Ed.2d 26 (1989); see also Scott v. Otis Elevator Co., 572 So. 2d 902 (Fla.1990); Martinolich v. Golden Leaf Mgmt., Inc., 786 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 3d DCA [*361] 2001), review denied, 814 So. 2d 439 (Fla.2002); Silvers v. Timothy J. O’Donnell Corp., 751 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). We affirm the order striking Flores’ claim for attorney’s fees. We agree with the Fourth District that chapter 440 does not provide for attorney’s fees to be awarded against an employer in an action for retaliatory discharge. S…
Authorities Cited
- Hawkins v. Hennepin Tech. Ctr., 900 F.2d 153 (8th Cir. 1990)
- Ewen v. Illinois, 498 U.S. 854 (U.S. 1990)
- Stroman v. W. Coast Grocery Co., 498 U.S. 854 (U.S. 1990)