FLORIDA HRS DISTRICT II, ET AL., PETITIONERS,
v.
ANN L. PICKARD, RESPONDENT
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 employer cannot recalculate a workers' compensation offset based on the yearly 5% increase in supplemental benefits after initially including them.
An employer took a workers' compensation offset and initially included supplemental benefits. The employer sought to recalculate the offset based on y…
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 Offset cases and more on FLexlaw
QUINCE, J.
We have for review a decision on the following question certified to be of great public importance:1
WHERE AN EMPLOYER TAKES A WORKERS’ COMPENSATION OFFSET UNDER SECTION 440.20(15), FLORIDA STATUTES (1985), AND INITIALLY INCLUDES SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFITS PAID UNDER SECTION 440.15(l)(e)l, FLORIDA STATUTES (1985), IS THE EMPLOYER ENTITLED TO RECALCULATE THE OFFSET BASED ON THE YEARLY 5% INCREASE IN SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFITS?
HRS District II v. Pickard, 778 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed in City of Clearwater v. Acker, 755 So. 2d 597 (Fla.1999), we answer the certified question in the negative and approve the First District’s decision in this case.2 It is so ordered. WELLS, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE and LEWIS, JJ., concur. . The First District specifically certified for review "the same question certified in Acker.” HRS District II v. Pickard, 778 So. 2d 299, 300 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999).
. State of Florida, Division of Retirement ("FRS") appeared as amicus curiae before the First District Court of Appeal and in its brief asserted that "the use of benefits paid under the FRS to offset workers’ compensa- lion benefits abridges and reduces the right of FRS members to receive Lhe full benefit of payments made to them.” We do not address this issue because it was not raised by either party before this Court and FRS did not file an amicus brief before this Court.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Orange Cnty. Fire Rescue & Johns E. Co., Inc. v. Antonelli, 794 So. 2d 758 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)…mount of supplemental benefits should not be included in the Grice offset calculation. At least two decisions of this court unequivocally support their position. HRS Dist. II v. Pickard, 778 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), approved on other grounds, 779 So. 2d 266 (Fla.2001); Dep’t of Transp. v. Johns, 753 So. 2d 108 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998), approved on other grounds, 755 So. 2d 603 (Fla.2000). Both decisions hold that while the employer is not entitled to recalculate a Grice offset each year based on the yearly…
-
Wade v. State, 870 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…those offenses and remanded for resentencing. Wade v. State, 751 So .2d 669 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). The supreme court initially accepted jurisdiction on his case and then dismissed review in 2001. Wade v. State, 760 So. 2d 949 (Fla.2000); Wade v. State, 779 So. 2d 266 (Fla.2001). [*232] Mr. Wade filed this timely postconviction motion in January 2003, alleging numerous grounds of ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The trial court entered an order disposing of some of the grounds on June 5, 2003, and a final…
Authorities Cited
- City OF Clearwater v. Judi Acker, 755 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 1999)
- HRS Dist. II v. Pickard, 778 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)