B. F. TODD ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS ET AL., PETITIONERS, CROSS-RESPONDENTS,
v.
JAMES G. HAMMOND ET AL., RESPONDENTS, CROSS-PETITIONERS; JAMES G. HAMMOND, PETITIONER, V. B. F. TODD ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS 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 addressed the validity of a 1958 workers' compensation lump sum award issued by a deputy and a subsequent 1962 claim for modification. The court held that while the deputy lacked authority to determine the manner of payment as lump sum, the underlying disability award was valid, and the 1962 modification claim was barred by statutory limitations.
The 1958 order was invalid only as to the determination of lump sum payment method; the underlying disability award remained valid. The 1962 claim for additional compensation was barred by the statutory limitations provisions of F.S. Sec. 440.28. However, the claim for medical attention was properly granted as remedial treatment without an award.
“We agree with the conclusion of the Commission that the 1958 order was invalid only insofar as it purported to determine the manner of payment by lump sum.”
Establishes the limited scope of invalidity—the deputy's authority to award compensation was valid, but the payment method was not within the deputy's authority.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 1958, a deputy issued an award of lump sum compensation upon claimant's stipulation, determining 15% permanent partial disability. Final compensati…
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 Claim For Additional Compensation cases and more on FLexlaw
The original award of lump sum compensation in this case was paid by order of the deputy entered in 1958 upon stipulation by claimant to all material facts, including determination of 15% permanent partial disability. Several later claims for modification were ultimately dismissed for lack of prosecution.1
In disposing of the present claim filed June 13, 1962, the deputy found (1) that the 1958 order was a nullity because under the act at that time only the Commission had authority to make a lump sum award of compensation; (2) that the final payment of compensation was made October 2, 1959, and the last medical payment without award was made in August I960; and that the present claim was an original timely claim filed during the pendency of appellate proceedings instituted by the employer.
We agree with the conclusion of the Commission that the 1958 order was invalid only insofar as it purported to determine the manner of payment by lump sum.2 The 1962 claim for additional compensation was therefore one seeking modification of the previous order determining disability compensation. On the facts recited above, modification was clearly foreclosed by the limitations provisions of F.S.Sec. 440.28, F.S.A. and the claim for further compensation should have been dismissed. The claim for medical attention, however, was properly granted by the deputy and affirmed by the Commission on the record and the statute governing remedial treatment without an award.3
The petition for certiorari is accordingly granted, the order directing further hearings is quashed, and the cause remanded with directions for entry of an order dismissing the claim for further compensation in accordance with this opinion, and for reconsideration of the award of fees to claimant’s counsel. Cross petition is denied.
The two petitions for attorneys’ fees of James G. Hammond are denied.
CALDWELL, C. J., and THORNAL, ERVIN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Watson v. DELTA Airlines, Inc., 288 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 1973)…years after payment of compensation or remedial treatment.” Justice Drew again applied the statutory exception in measuring the two-year time limit from the last remedial treatment “without an award” in B. F. Todd Electrical Contractors v. Hammond, 212 So. 2d 301 (Fla.1968). Our claimant filed his claim for compensation on May 25, 1970, promptly after the last payment of compensation to him without an award which was made on April 20, 1970, and thus was clearly within the two-year statutory exception of Fla…
Authorities Cited
- Sullivan v. Mayo, 106 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958)
- Russell v. Bass, 107 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958)
- Pancoast v. McARTHUR Jersey Farms, Inc., 164 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 1964)
- B. F. Todd Elec. Contractors v. Hammond, 164 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 1964)