WILFRED R. MALSCHICK, APPELLANT,
v.
GENERAL ACCIDENT GROUP AND OSCAR GINER, 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 addresses whether a workers' compensation carrier, after settling with a claimant through a "wash out" settlement, can still sue a third-party tortfeasor. The court held that the carrier can initiate such a suit if the claimant fails to do so within one year of the cause of action accruing.
No, a "wash out" settlement does not prevent the workers' compensation carrier from instituting an independent suit against a third-party tortfeasor if the claimant has not filed suit within one year of the cause of action accruing. The carrier may bring such a suit for the use and benefit of the claimant.
“The sole point on this appeal is whether or not by entering into a "wash out" set tlement, pursuant to the provisions of § 440.20(10), Fla.Stat., F.S.A., a compensation carrier is prevented from instituting a suit against a third party tort feasor pursuant to the provisions of § 440.39(2) (4) (a), Fla.Stat., F.S.A.”
This quote frames the central legal question of the appeal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant, Wilfred R. Malschick, was injured and received a "wash out" settlement from his workers' compensation carrier, General Accident Group. …
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 Third Party Tortfeasor cases and more on FLexlaw
The sole point on this appeal is whether or not by entering into a “wash out” set*52tlement, pursuant to the provisions of § 440.20(10), Fla.Stat., F.S.A., a compensation carrier is prevented from instituting a suit against a third party tort feasor pursuant to the provisions of § 440.39(2) (4) (a), Fla.Stat., F.S.A.
We hold that it is not, and the carrier may institute an independent suit for the use and benefit of the claimant when the one year period from the date of the accrual of cause of action has expired and the claimant has not instituted an action against a third party tort feasor. See: § 440.39(4) (a), Fla.Stat., F.S.A. Of course the parties, at the time of the entry into of the stipulation of “wash out” settlement, could provide any provisions in their stipulation relative to this and other matters, subject to the approval of the Judge of Industrial Claims.
Therefore, for the reasons above stated, the order here under review is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.