DONALD SHAW, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
FLORIDA STEEL CORP. AND SPECIALTY RISK SERVICES, INC., APPELLEES/CROSS-APPELLANTS
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Impairment Rating cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this workers’ compensation case, claimant complains of the denial of permanent total disability benefits, the impairment rating awarded and the denial of penalties on indemnity benefits awarded; and the employer and carrier cross-appeal complaining of the refusal to permit an amendment to their witness and exhibit lists. We affirm without discussion as to all issues raised, save one. We reverse the denial of penalties on the indemnity benefits awarded because the employer and carrier neither paid the benefits within seven days of when they became due, as required by section 440.20(6), Florida Statutes (Supp.1994), nor exercised the pay-and-investigate option provided by section 440.20(4); and because the employer and carrier failed to offer any evidence to suggest that they were unaware, as of the date on which claimant alleged the benefits were due, of facts supporting the obligation to pay those benefits. See, e.g., Eastern Indus., Inc. v. Burnham, 750 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Bruno’s, Inc./Food World v. Bruner, 805 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).
AFFIRMED IN PART and REVERSED IN PART.
WEBSTER, PADOVANO and POLSTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dollar Gen. & Dollar Gen. Corp. v. McCOY, 927 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…the employer/self-insured did not offer any relevant evidence showing that it was unaware, as of the date on which claimant alleged the benefits were due, of facts supporting the obligation to pay those benefits. See, e.g., Shaw v. Fla. Steel Corp., 846 So. 2d 1254 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); Bruno’s, Inc./Food World v. Bruner, 805 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); Eastern Indus., Inc. v. Burnham, 750 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). For the same reasons, the judge also erred in denying interest on the past due benefit…
-
Jones v. City OF ST. Petersburg, 46 So. 3d 637 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…y statute in cases where the employer or carrier has denied a claim for the benefits on which penalties are claimed and the JCC has ordered the employer or carrier to pay those benefits following an evidentiary hearing. See Shaw v. Fla. Steel Corp., 846 So. 2d 1254 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); B & L Servs., Inc. v. Coach USA, 791 So. 2d 1138 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Serv. Mgmt. Sys. v. Hood, 790 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); E. Indus. v. Burnham, 750 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Regardless of whether the benefit on w…
Authorities Cited
- E. Indus., Inc. v. Burnham, 750 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- Bruno's v. Bruner, 805 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)