SHIRLEY ANDERSON, APPELLANT,
v.
NORTH PORT SERVICES OF FLORIDA, LLC DBA DAYTONA BEACH HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER AND THE PMA INSURANCE GROUP, APPELLEE
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 Judge of Compensation Claims' order concluding that the claimant had fully and finally settled her workers' compensation claim and failed to establish any legally cognizable basis for avoiding the settlement. The court found that the claimant's argument—that the settlement was insufficient to meet her financial needs—lacked legal authority and record support.
The court affirmed the JCC's order finding that the claimant's case was fully and finally settled and that there was no basis to disturb the settlement. The claimant failed to raise a preliminary basis for reversal because her argument that the settlement was insufficient lacked legal authority and record support.
[1] A party appealing a judicial order bears the burden of demonstrating error, and the appellate court has no duty to construct or answer legal questions not properly argued…
[2] An appellate court may summarily affirm an order when the appellant fails to raise a preliminary basis for reversal.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Rather than raising a specific legal or factual argument and explaining why the case should be decided in her favor, Claimant argues, in essence, that the settlement is not sufficient to meet her financial needs.”
Establishes that the claimant failed to present proper legal arguments on appeal, only challenging the adequacy of the settlement amount.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceClaimant alleged a workers' compensation injury with a date of accident of June 30, 2012. A settlement agreement was reached in the case. Claimant cha…
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 Burden Of Proof On Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
In this workers’ compensation appeal, Claimant challenges an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) that concludes Claimant has fully and finally settled her workers’ compensation claim emanating from an alleged June 30, 2012, date of accident. The appealed order also concludes that Claimant failed to raise or establish a legally cognizable basis for avoiding the terms of this settlement. Upon receipt of Claimant’s amended initial brief, this court entered an order advising the parties that this appeal is being considered for summary affirmance under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.315(a). Accordingly, the parties were directed to refrain from further briefing.
Rather than raising a specific legal or factual argument and explaining why the case should be decided in her favor, Claimant argues, in essence, that the settlement is not sufficient to meet her financial needs. Claimant’s argument, which is unaccompanied by record support or legal authority that would permit relief on such a basis, misapprehends the role of this court and her role as a litigant seeking relief therefrom. See Lynn v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 81 So.2d 511, 513 (Fla.1955) (explaining that party bringing appeal has duty to “make error clearly appear,” and court has no duty to answer questions raised in “perfunctory” manner). Claimant has failed to demonstrate error on this record as is her burden, and this court is under no obligation to construct or answer a legal question not properly argued by Claimant herself. Cabrera v. Outdoor Empire Inc., 134 So.3d 573, 577 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014). Based on the foregoing, Claimant has failed to raise a preliminary basis for reversal. Accordingly, we affirm the JCC’s order that finds that Claimant’s case is fully and finally settled and that there is no basis to disturb this settlement.
AFFIRMED.
PADOVANO, WETHERELL, and SWANSON, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Campbell v. State, 254 So. 3d 622 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)…was not arrested for this incident until December 3, 2015. If other documents show that Campbell was in jail during this period, he failed to include them in the record before us, which is his burden. See Anderson v. N. Port Servs. of Fla., LLC, 151 So. 3d 29, 30 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014). Because there is no evidentiary basis to support the assertions by Campbell and the State, we affirm without reviewing the trial court’s reasoning. See Dade Cty. Sch. Bd. v. Radio Station WQBA, 731 So. 2d 638, 644 (Fla.…
Authorities Cited
- Lynn v. City OF Fort Lauderdale, 81 So. 2d 511 (Fla. 1955)
- Sterling Mirror Co., LLC v. THE Jordon Glass Corp. (Fla. 3d DCA 2022)
- Domingo A. Cabrera v. Outdoor Empire Inc., 134 So. 3d 573 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)