CHARLES SCHWING, PETITIONER,
v.
HICKORY HOUSE, INC., THE FIDELITY & CASUALTY COMPANY OF NEW YORK, AND FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION, 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 denied a petition for certiorari, affirming an Industrial Commission order that denied compensation for a back injury. The court found the deputy commissioner's decision, which attributed the condition to previous injuries rather than the alleged accident, was supported by substantial evidence.
Yes, the order of the deputy commissioner, as affirmed by the full commission, was supported by competent, substantial evidence and in accordance with the essential requirements of law.
“The deputy found that the conditions for which compensation was sought were not caused, contributed to, or aggravated by the alleged accident, but were the natural result of previous injuries and back difficulties.”
This quote establishes the factual basis for the deputy commissioner's denial of compensation.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePetitioner sought compensation for a back injury, alleging it resulted from an accident. The deputy commissioner found the condition was a natural res…
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 Essential Requirements Of Law cases and more on FLexlaw
By his petition for certiorari to the Florida Industrial Commission, petitioner seeks review .by this.court of an order of the full commission affirming the order of its deputy in which petitioner was denied compensation for an alleged injury to his back. The deputy found that the conditions for which compensation was sought were not caused, contributed to, or aggravated by the alleged accident, but were the natural result of previous injuries and back difficulties.
The court, having fully considered all matters raised by the petition and having heard the arguments of the parties, is of the opinion that the order of the deputy is supported by competent, substantial evidence, and that the affirmance of his order by the full commission was in all respects in accordance with the essential requirements of law. The petition for a writ of certiorari is therefore denied.
It is so ordered.
THOMAS, C. J., and TERRELL, HOB-SON, THORNAL and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.