LOUIS P. PFEFFER, ET AL., PETITIONERS,
v.
LABOR READY SOUTHEAST, INC., ET AL., RESPONDENTS
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.
The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a workers' compensation case where the statutory attorney's fee schedule limited three attorneys to $50.44 per hour ($13,017.80 total) for 258.10 hours of work, while the employer's attorney earned over $50,000. The Court quashed the First District's decision and remanded based on its contemporaneous holding in Castellanos v. Next Door Co. declaring the fee provision unconstitutional.
The statutory attorney's fee provision is unconstitutional. The Court quashed the First District's affirmance of the fee award and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the holding in Castellanos v. Next Door Co.
[1] A statutory attorney's fee provision in workers' compensation cases may be declared unconstitutional if it results in an unconstitutionally low hourly rate for attorneys.
[2] A court's prior decision declaring a statutory attorney's fee provision unconstitutional dictates the outcome of subsequent cases relying on that same provision.
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“Pursuant to the fee schedule in section 440.34, Florida Statutes, the judge of compensation claims was constrained to award a total of $13,017.80 in attorney's fees, to be split by three attorneys that spent a total of 258.10 hours on the case, for a fee award of $50.44 per hour. The attorney for the employer/carrier, on the other hand, was paid more than $50,000.”
Illustrates the disparate fee awards that prompted the constitutional challenge.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThree attorneys spent a combined 258.10 hours on a workers' compensation case. Under the statutory fee schedule in section 440.34, Florida Statutes, t…
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 Attorney'S Fees In Workers' Compensation cases and more on FLexlaw
This case is before this Court for review of the decision of the Fust District Court of Appeal in Pfeffer v. Labor Ready Southeast, Inc., 155 So.3d 1155, 1156 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014), a workers’ compensation case involving the statutory attorney’s fee provision declared unconstitutional in this Court’s opinion in Castellanos v. Next Door Co., No. SC13-2082, 192 So.3d 431, 432-33, 2016 WL 1700521, slip op. at 1-2 (Fla. Apr. 28, 2016). Pursuant to the fee schedule in section 440.34, Florida Statutes, the judge of compensation claims was constrained to award a total of $13,017.80 in attorney’s fees, to be split by three attorneys that spent a total of 258.10 hours on the case, for a fee award of $50.44 per hour. The attorney for the employer/car*885rier, on the other hand, was paid more than $50,000.
In an unelaborated' opinion, the First District affirmed the statutory fee award “[b]ased on” its decision in Castellanos [v. Next Door Co./Amerisure Ins. Co., 124 So.3d 392 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) ] and certified that its disposition passed upon 'the same question certified in Castellanos. Pfeffer, 155 So.3d at 1156. We therefore have jurisdiction. See art. V, §§ 3(b)(3), (4), Fla. Const. Because our holding in Castellanos resolves this issue, we quash the First District’s decision and remand for further proceedings consistent with Castellanos. See also Richardson v. Aramark/Sedgwick CMS, No. SC14-738, 193 So.3d 880-81, 2016 WL 1704132, slip op. at 2-3 (Fla. Apr. 28, 2016); Diaz v. Palmetto Gen. Hosp., No. SC14-1916, 191 So.3d 882, 882, 2016 WL 1704091, at *1 (Fla. Apr. 28, 2016).
It is so ordered.
LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, and PERRY, JJ., concur.
CANADY and POLSTON, JJ., dissent.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Diaz v. Palmetto Gen. Hosp., 191 So. 3d 882 (Fla. 2016)…emand for [*883] further proceedings consistent with Castel-lanos. See also Richardson v. Aramark/Sedgwick CMS, No. SC14-738, 193 So. 3d 880-81, 2016 WL 1704132, slip op. at 2-3 (Fla. Apr. 28, 2016); Pfeffer v. Labor Ready Se., Inc., .No. SC14-1325, 191 So. 3d 884, 882, 2016 WL 1708823, at *1 (Fla. Apr. 28, 2016). It is so ordered. LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, and PERRY, JJ., concur. ■ CANADY and POLSTON, JJ., dissent. . We have jurisdiction. See art. V, §§ 3(b)(3), (4), Fla. Const.…
-
Richardson v. Aramark/Sedgwick CMS, 193 So. 3d 880 (Fla. 2016)…e art. V, §§ 3(b)(3), (4), Fla. Const. Because our holding in Castella-nos clearly resolves this issue, we quash the First District’s decision and remand for further proceedings consistent with Castellanos. See also Pfeffer v. Labor Ready Se., Inc., 191 So. 3d 884, 884-85 (Fla.2016); Diaz v. Palmetto Gen. Hosp., 191 So. 3d 882, 882-83 (Fla.2016). It is so ordered. LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, and PERRY, JJ., concur. CANADY and POLSTON, JJ., dissent.…
-
Pfeffer v. Labor Ready Se., Inc., 197 So. 3d 636 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…. 3d 392 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)). The Florida Supreme Court has now quashed our decision and remanded for further proceedings consistent with its decision in Castellanos v. Next Door Co., 192 So. 3d 431 (Fla.2016). See Pfeffer v. Labor Ready Se., Inc., 191 So. 3d 884 (Fla.2016). Accordingly, we reverse the order on appeal and remand for further proceedings. REVERSED AND REMANDED OSTERHAUS, WINOKUR, and WINSOR, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Castellanos v. Next Door Co., 192 So. 3d 431 (Fla. 2016)
- Castellanos v. Next Door Company/Amerisure Ins. Co., 124 So. 3d 392 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)
- Pfeffer v. Labor Ready Se., Inc., 155 So. 3d 1155 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
- Diaz v. Palmetto Gen. Hosp., 191 So. 3d 882 (Fla. 2016)
- Richardson v. Aramark/Sedgwick CMS, 193 So. 3d 880 (Fla. 2016)