THOMAS GAMAGE, PETITIONER,
v.
WILLIAM L. REEKS AND THE 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 court held that a letter from claimant's new counsel, referencing the prior claim number and requesting a hearing, was sufficient to constitute a new claim.
A claimant injured in 1959 filed an initial claim, which was dismissed to pursue a separate action. New counsel later sent a letter referencing the or…
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 Incorporation By Reference cases and more on FLexlaw
Petition for writ of certiorari is here directed to an order of the Industrial Commission involving the sufficiency of a letter from claimant’s counsel to constitute a claim.
The claimant was injured on March 30, 1959, and filed an initial claim by his attorney on July 28, 1960. Order of dismissal was on August 29, 1960, duly entered upon request of claimant, for purposes of facilitating disposition of an action at law arising out of the same circumstances. By letter of March 22, 1961, new counsel made specific reference to the first claim by the number assigned to the file and advised the Commission that he was representing the claimant in the compensation matter as follows: “With respect to the above matter, this is to inform you that I am representing the claimant and desire to have the matter set down for hearing.”
Under principles fully discussed in earlier opinions 1 the Commission found, upon appeal from an adverse ruling of the deputy, that the quoted language was adequate to state a claim anew, remanded the cause for determination on the merits, and awarded attorney’s fees in connection with the appeal.
The order, in our opinion, properly disposed of the dispute. The situation presented no issue with respect to and no necessity for reviver of the former claim.2 Instead, the letter in question adequately and properly, we think, incorporated by reference all essential information and procedural matters detailed in the record of *722that claim. The writ should accordingly be denied.
It is so ordered.
ROBERTS, C. J., and THORNAL, O’CONNELL and CALDWELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Joffre E. Turner v. Keller Kitchen Cabinets, 247 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 1971)…ng of the Taff, Port Everglades and Florida Telephone decisions indicates that any paper lodged with the Commission indicating a probability that the employee has not received compensation or benefits is treated as a claim. See also Gamage v. Reeks, 142 So. 2d 721 (Fla.1962). This indication is supported by the applicable portions of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. Rule of Procedure No. 12, which restates Fla.Stat. § 440.19(1) (c), F.S.A. relating to claims, states: “Claims for compensation shall be filed w…
-
Mays v. Dixie Packers & Crawford & Co., 677 So. 2d 992 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…or benefits is treated as a “claim” and processed as such in the same manner as if it were filed with all the niceties of expert legal attention. (Emphasis added.) The Florida Supreme Court cited the Taff opinion with approval in Gamage v. Reeks, 142 So. 2d 721 (Fla.1962). In Gamage, a claim had been filed in 1959 and thereafter voluntarily dismissed. In a March 1961 letter, new counsel, without filing a separate, formal claim, made specific reference to the first claim by the number assigned to the file a…
Authorities Cited
- Port Everglades Terminal Co., Inc. v. Allan Canty & the Fla. Indus. Comm'n, 120 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 1960)
- A. B. Taff & Sons v. Clark, 110 So. 2d 428 (Fla. 1st DCA 1959)