LEVY COUNTY TRANSIT/GALLAGHER BASSETT SERVICES, APPELLANTS,
v.
ANTOINETTE KOKENZIE, 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 Florida First District Court of Appeal dismissed an employer/carrier's appeal challenging an award of attorney's fees to the claimant for defeating a fraud defense, holding that it lacked jurisdiction to review the fee entitlement determination because the judge of compensation claims reserved jurisdiction over the amount of the fees.
The court lacks jurisdiction to review the determination of entitlement to attorney's fees where the judge of compensation claims has reserved jurisdiction over the amount of the fees. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
[1] A determination of entitlement to attorney's fees is not appealable when the judge of compensation claims reserves jurisdiction to determine the amount of the fees.
[2] An appeal challenging only the entitlement to attorney's fees, where the amount is still subject to determination, will be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
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“a determination of entitlement to attorney's fees is not appealable where jurisdiction is reserved to determine the amount of the fees”
Establishes the core jurisdictional rule preventing appellate review when fee amount determination is reserved
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe claimant filed a workers' compensation claim following a workplace injury. The employer/carrier asserted a fraud defense against the claim. In a p…
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 Fraud Defense cases and more on FLexlaw
In this workers’ compensation appeal, the employer/carrier (E/C) challenges the portion of the order entered by the judge of compensation claims (JCC) on remand from Levy County Transit/Gallagher Bassett Servs. v. Kokenzie, 220 So.3d 1251 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (Kokenzie I), finding the claimant entitled to attorney’s fees for defeating the fraud defense asserted by the E/C. We dismiss the appeal for the reasons that follow.
In Kokenzie I, we affirmed the JCC’s rejection of the fraud defense asserted by the E/C but we reversed the award of temporary partial disability (TPD) benefits to the claimant because the JCC’s finding that the workplace injury was the major contributing cause of the claimant’s injuries was not supported by competent substantial evidence. Id. at 1252. We remanded “for entry of an order consistent with th[e] opinion,” id. at 1253, and on remand, the JCC entered an order rejecting the fraud defense and denying the claim for TPD benefits. The order also granted the claimant’s claim for attorney’s fees for successfully defeating the fraud defense, but reserved jurisdiction to determine the amount of the fee award if the parties were unable to agree upon the amount.
On appeal, the E/C argues that JCC erred in determining that the claimant was entitled to attorney’s fees because the claimant failed to secure any past benefits and no future benefits will ever be due because the claimant failed to prove that the injury was work-related. The claimant responds that we lack jurisdiction to review the portion of the order determining her entitlement to fees because the JCC reserved jurisdiction on the amount of the fees.
Although the E/C may well be correct on the merits, we agree with the claimant that we lack jurisdiction to review the issue at this time. Indeed, this court has repeatedly held that a determination of entitlement to attorney’s fees is not ap-pealable where jurisdiction is reserved to determine the amount of the fees. See, e.g., Stanley Steemer Int’l v. Smith, 139 So.3d 507 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); Dep’t of Corr. v. Ferguson, 98 So.3d 669, 670 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); Polk Cty. Bd. of Cty. Comm’rs v. Lyon-Spires, 85 So.3d 582 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); Zampell Refractories, Inc. v. Welch, 61 So.3d 1160 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011); Dep’t of Children & Families v. Monroe, 744 So.2d 1163, 1164 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Se. Recycling v. Cottongim, 728 So.2d 342, 342-43 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Wometco Enters. v. Cordoves, 650 So.2d 1117 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). Although the other portions of the order entered on remand are appealable, see Commercial Carrier Corp. v. LaPointe, 723 So.2d 912, 914 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), they were not challenged by either party. Accordingly, because this appeal only concerns the determination of entitlement to attorney’s *1292fees, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
DISMISSED.
WETHERELL, MAKAR, and KELSEY, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Commercial Carrier Corp. & Comcar Indus., Inc. v. LaPOINTE, 723 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Dep't OF Child. & Families v. Monroe, 744 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Wometco Enters. & Cigna Ins. Co. v. Cordoves, 650 So. 2d 1117 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
- Se. Recycling & Argonaut Ins. Co. v. Cottongim, 728 So. 2d 342 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Zampell Refractories, Inc. v. Welch, 61 So. 3d 1160 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)
- Polk Cnty. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs & Commercial Risk Mgmt. v. Lyon-Spires, 85 So. 3d 582 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
- Dep't OF Corrections/Suwannee Corr. Institute/State of Fla. v. Ferguson, 98 So. 3d 669 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
- Levy Cnty. Transit/Gallagher Bassett Servs. v. Kokenzie, 220 So. 3d 1251 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)
- Stanley Steemer Int'l v. Smith, 139 So. 3d 507 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
- Celine Sayers v. Sayers, 139 So. 3d 507 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)