GRIMES
v.
UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS, ET AL.
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.
A workers' compensation claimant sought to recover attorney's fees for representation in pursuing additional compensation benefits. The court reversed the lower bodies' decision that the claimant should pay his attorney, holding that the employer and insurance carrier must pay reasonable attorney's fees under Florida Statutes § 440.84 when circumstances necessitated legal representation.
The employer or its insurance carrier must pay the claimant's attorney reasonable fees. The court held that the deputy commissioner did not properly apply Florida Statutes § 440.84 to the facts, as the circumstances reasonably indicated that employment of an attorney was necessary for the claimant to collect his claim.
“It appears from the record in this case that the claimant employed an attorney to represent him in collecting additional compensation at a time when the circumstances reasonably indicated to him that the employment of an attorney to represent him was necessary if he was to collect his claim.”
Establishes the legal standard that circumstances must reasonably indicate necessity of legal representation for attorney fees to be paid by employer/carrier.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceClaimant sought additional workers' compensation to which the employer and carrier had decided he was entitled. Between March 1950 and later that year…
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 Worker'S Compensation cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause came on to be heard on appeal from an order of the full commission affirming a deputy commissioner’s order.
The only dispute is as to whether the employer or insurance carrier — or the claimant himself — should be required to pay claimant’s attorney a reasonable fee.
The deputy commissioner found that claimant’s attorney was entitled to a reasonable fee for representing him and that $50 would be a reasonable fee, but that it should be paid by the claimant and not by the employer or carrier. The deputy commissioner recited in his order testimony of the claimant and his wife to the effect that in March 1950 and again about two months later they requested Mr. Slickis as claims representative of the carrier to pay certain additional compensation to which the carrier had decided claimant was entitled — and that upon each request in March 1950 and later Mr. Slickis told them he would look into the matter.
No favorable consideration of his claim for additional compensation was reported to the claimant until after his attorney, Mr. Kelly, filed a claim with the commission on December 11,1950.
It appears from the record in this case that the claimant employed an attorney to represent him in collecting additional compensation at a time when the circumstances reasonably indicated to him that the employment of an attorney to represent him was necessary if he was to collect his claim. It further appears that the attorney rendered services in the matter which the deputy commissioner considered to be worth $50.
It is the finding of this court that the deputy commissioner did not properly apply the provisions of section 440.84, Florida Statutes 1951, to the facts and circumstances in this case.
It is therefore ordered that the deputy commissioner’s order of May 22, 1951 and the full commission’s order of September 28, 1951 affirming such order be, and the same are, reversed.
It is further ordered that the employer or its insurance carrier pay to the claimant for the use and benefit of his attorney the sum of $50 for his services in prosecuting the *115claim before the deputy commissioner, and the further sum of $75 for his services before the full'commission and upon appeal to this court.
It is further ordered that the employer or its insurance carrier pay to the claimant the sum of $59.18, the amount of the costs paid by him before the deputy commissioner, the full commission and this court.