JANICE CARPENTER, APPELLANT,
v.
B & G RESORT PROPERTIES, LTD. AND B & G RESORT MANAGEMENT, INC., APPELLEES
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.
In this workers' compensation appeal, the court affirmed a denial of benefits to an employee injured at a motel, holding that the property owners (B & G Resort Properties and B & G Resort Management) were not her employers because she was employed by a court-appointed receiver managing the property during litigation.
The court held that the appellees were not Carpenter's employers because competent substantial evidence showed that claimant neither received directions from nor was under the control of appellees. Therefore, the JCC lacked jurisdiction to impose workers' compensation liability on appellees.
[1] A receiver appointed by a circuit court to operate a property during litigation is the employer of the property's employees, not the property owners.
[2] An employer-employee relationship for workers' compensation purposes requires evidence of direction and control by the alleged employer.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“At the time of her injury, claimant was employed by the receiver and not appellees.”
The JCC's factual finding establishing that the receiver, not the property owners, was the actual employer.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJanice Carpenter was employed as head housekeeper at the Wind Drift Motel when she suffered a back injury on August 12, 1997. At the time of her injur…
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 Control Test For Employment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this workers’ compensation appeal, the claimant, Janice Carpenter, appeals a final order of the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) which denied claimant’s petition for benefits against B & G Resort Properties, Ltd. and B & G Resort Management, Inc., appellees, on the ground that appellees were not claimant’s employer under section 440.02(14), Florida Statutes (1996). We affirm.
Claimant was employed as the head housekeeper of the Wind Drift Motel when she injured her back on August 12, 1997. At the time of her injury, the motel was being operated by a receiver appointed by the circuit court to protect the motel property during the pendency of litigation between appellee, B & G Resort Properties Ltd., an owner of the property along with appellee, B & G Resort Management, Inc., and potential purchasers, who had occupied the property under a pre-occupancy agreement pending closing on the sale of the property. The JCC found that, at the time of her injury, claimant was employed by the receiver and not appellees. Competent substantial evidence in the record supports the JCC’s findings in that claimant neither received directions from nor was under the control of appellees. Because appellees were not employers of claimant, the JCC had no jurisdiction over appellees for the purpose of imposing workers’ compensation liability on them for claimant’s injuries. See Pacific Indem. Co. et al. v. Workmen’s Compensation Appeals Bd., 258 Cal.App.2d 35, 65 Cal.Rptr. 429 (2d Dist.1968), see also Ricketts v. Haynes, 630 So. 2d 1232 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994), and § 440.02(14), Fla. Stat. (1997).
AFFIRMED.
BENTON, VAN NORTWICK and LEWIS, JJ., concur.