FLORIDA RETAIL FEDERATION SELF-INSURED FUND-SUMMIT CLAIMS CENTER, APPELLANT,
v.
DANIEL QUINTERO AND TIP TOP ENTERPRISES, 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.
Florida appellate court dismissed an insurance carrier's appeal of an order finding its workers' compensation policy was in effect on the injury date, holding the order was not a final or appealable nonfinal order under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.180(b)(1).
An order finding that a workers' compensation policy was in full force and effect on the date of injury is not appealable as a nonfinal order when other matters remain pending before the Judge of Compensation Claims.
[1] An order determining that a workers' compensation policy was in effect on the date of injury is not appealable as a nonfinal order under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedu…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAn insurance carrier issued a workers' compensation policy to an employer. The claimant suffered an industrial accident, and the carrier appealed an o…
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 Policy Coverage cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, an insurance carrier, appeals an order finding that the workers’ compensation policy issued by it to the employer below was in full force and effect on the date of the industrial accident suffered by the claimant. The order further concludes that appellant has the duty to defend the employer in this case, must pay all workers’ compensation benefits, if any, owed to the claimant, and shall reimburse the employer for all benefits paid to the claimant. Because this order neither represents a final disposition of the proceedings below nor does it fall within the class of nonfinal orders appealable pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.180(b)(1), we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We acknowledge that an appeal of an order finding that the employer’s workers’ compensation policy was in effect on the date of the claimant’s injury was entertained by the court in Florida Workers’ Compensation Joint Underwriting Association v. Mundell, 765 So. 2d 151 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). However, that fact is not determinative of the jurisdictional issue, since that issue is not addressed in the court’s opinion, nor is it clear that any matters other than the coverage issue were pending before the Judge of Compensation Claims at the time, as is clearly the case here.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
WOLF, C.J., VAN NORTWICK and BROWNING, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Maradriaga v. 7-Eleven & Kemper Grp., 29 So. 3d 440 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…’s response to this Court’s show cause order entered January 12, 2010, we GRANT Appellees’ motion to dismiss and DISMISS this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.180(b)(1). See also Fla. Retail Fed’n Self-Insured, Fund v. Quintero, 909 So. 2d 332, 333 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). LEWIS, THOMAS, and WETHERELL, JJ., concur.…
-
Euna Verly v. Orange County/Female Detention Ctr. & Alternative Serv. Concepts, 30 So. 3d 720 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…Upon review of Appellant’s response to this court’s February 16, 2010, order to show cause, we conclude the order being appealed is a non-appealable, non-final order. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.180(b)(1); Fla. Retail Fed’n Self-Insured, Fund v. Quintero, 909 So. 2d 332, 333 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. WOLF, WEBSTER AND THOMAS, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Fla. Workers' Comp. Joint Underwriting Ass'n & Travelers Indem. Co. v. Mundell, 765 So. 2d 151 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)