CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, PETITIONER,
v.
EMMETT MILLER 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 reviewed an order awarding compensation to a claimant, finding the deputy commissioner's order inadequate for failing to specify the nature of the injuries and link them to the accident. The court ultimately quashed the order and remanded for dismissal due to a lack of evidence supporting the claim's relation to the accident.
The deputy commissioner's order was inadequate because it failed to specify the nature of the injuries and did not find that the claimant's condition was related to the 1961 accident. Furthermore, the record contained no evidence to support such a finding.
“we conclude that the deputy's order is inadequate because it does not specify the nature of the injuries which caused the disability for which claimant is compensated and did not find that claimant's condition is related to the 1961 work-connected accident.”
This quote explains the primary reason for the court's decision to review and potentially overturn the lower court's order.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA claimant was awarded compensation by a deputy commissioner, which was affirmed by the Full Commission. The City of Miami Beach petitioned for a writ…
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 Causation In Workers' Compensation cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause is before us on Petition for Writ of Certiorari to review the order of the Full Commission which affirmed the deputy’s award of compensation to claimant.
Oral argument would serve no useful purpose and it is therefore dispensed with pursuant to Florida Appellate Rule 3.10, subd. e, 31 F.S.A.
Upon consideration of the Petition, record and briefs, we conclude that the deputy’s order is inadequate because it does not specify the nature of the injuries which caused the disability for which claimant is compensated and did not find that claimant’s condition is related to the 1961 work-connected accident. These defects would require a remand for the entry of a proper order were it not for the fact that the record reveals no evidence which would sup*230port a finding that claimant’s condition is related to the 1961 accident.
Accordingly, petition for writ of certi-orari is hereby granted, the order of the Full Commission quashed and the cause remanded with directions to the Commission to enter an order quashing the order of the Deputy Commissioner and directing that the claim be dismissed.
THOMAS, ROBERTS, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.
DREW, C. J., dissents with opinion.
(dissenting) :
I would remand for adequate findings. I don’t agree that we should encroach on the power of the deputy to determine the facts.
DREW, Chief Justice
(dissenting) :
I would remand for adequate findings. I don’t agree that we should encroach on the power of the deputy to determine the facts.