GEORGE MCADAMS, APPELLANT,
v.
ARMORED CAR SERVICE OF FLORIDA, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND WESLEY CARL KNIGHT, HOME INDEMNITY COMPANY AND TRI-CITY SEPTIC TANK COMPANY, 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.
This case involves an appeal by an employee regarding the amount allotted to a workmen's compensation lienor from a settlement. The appellate court affirmed the lower court's order, referencing a prior related appeal.
Yes, the trial judge correctly determined that the workmen's compensation lienor had rights under subsection 3 of § 440.39, Fla.Stat.
“The order appealed allotted to the workmen's compensation lienor an amount pursuant to subsection 3 of § 440.39, Fla.Stat.,F.S.A. as that section existed prior to amendment in 1959.”
Describes the subject of the appeal and the relevant statute.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe employee-plaintiff appealed an order that allotted a specific amount to the workmen's compensation lienor under a statute. The employee argued tha…
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.
This appeal is from the same order which was the subject of the appeal in Case No. 61-435, Workmen’s Compensation Lienor, Home Indemnity Company, as carrier, and Tri-City Septic Tank Company, as employer v. McAdams, Armored Car Service of Florida and Wesley Carl Knight, Fla.App., 139 So.2d 433. The order appealed allotted to the workmen’s compensation lienor an amount pursuant to subsection 3 of § 440.39, Fla.Stat.,F.S.A. as that section existed prior to amendment in 1959. The employee-plaintiff, being dissatisfied with the amount awarded the workmen’s compensation lienor, has prosecuted this appeal.
The employee contends that having correctly decided that the insurance carrier could not recover under subsection 4 of § 440.39, Fla.Stat.,F.S.A., the trial judge then incorrectly determined that the carrier had rights under subsection 3. In appeal No. 61-435 we held that the trial judge correctly found that subsection 3 was applicable; thereby affirmance of the same order is required upon this appeal.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Florentine Reyes v. Leonard L. Banks, 292 So. 2d 39 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)…ecurity Mutual Casualty Co. v. Grice, 172 So. 2d 834 (Fla.App.1965); Luby Chevrolet Inc. v. Foster, 177 So. 2d 510 (Fla.App.1965); Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. McNair, 152 So. 2d 805 (Fla.App.1963); McAdams v. Armored Car Service of Florida, 139 So. 2d 435 (Fla.App. 1962); Arex Indemnity Co. v. Radin, 72 So. 2d 393 (Fla.1954). It has been urged by the Florida Supreme Court that no criterion which attempts to apply exact mathematical calculations to equitable distribution situations would be consisten…
-
White v. Reserve Ins. Co., 299 So. 2d 661 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)…ity Mutual Casualty Co. v. Grice, 172 So. 2d 834 (Fla.App.1965); Luby Chevrolet, Inc. v. Foster, 177 So. 2d 510 (Fla.App. 1965); Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. McNair, 152 So. 2d 805 (Fla.App. 1963); McAdams v. Armored Car Serv ice of Florida, 139 So. 2d 435 (Fla.App. 1962); Arex Indemnity Co. v. Radin, 72 So. 2d 393 (Fla.1954). “It has been urged by the Florida Supreme Court that no criterion which attempts to apply exact mathematical calculations to equitable distribution situations would be consiste…
Authorities Cited
- Home Indem. Co. v. McADAMS, 139 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)