EMMA MURRAY, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
MARINERS HEALTH/ACE USA, APPELLEES/CROSS-APPELLANTS
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.
Florida appellate court affirmed the award of attorney's fees calculated under the statutory guideline formula in section 440.34(1), rejecting constitutional challenges to the 2003 amendments and certifying a question of great public importance regarding whether the formula is the sole standard for reasonableness.
The amended provisions of section 440.34(1), Florida Statutes, establish a guideline formula that controls the award of reasonable attorney's fees in workers' compensation cases, and constitutional challenges to this formula are rejected.
[1] The amended provisions of section 440.34(1), Florida Statutes (2003), establish a guideline formula that controls the determination of reasonable attorney's fees in worke…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceEmma Murray, a workers' compensation claimant, appealed a Judge of Compensation Claims' order awarding attorney's fees calculated strictly in accordan…
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 Constitutional Challenge To Statute cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The claimant, Emma Murray, appeals the Judge of Compensation Claims’ (JCC) order awarding an attorney’s fee in strict accordance with the guideline formula set forth in section 440.34(1), Florida Statutes (2005). The appellant’s constitutional challenges to this statute, as significantly amended in 2003, were considered and rejected in our recent decisions in Lundy v. Four Seasons Ocean Grand Palm Beach, 932 So. 2d 506 (1st DCA 2006); and Campbell v. Aramark, 933 So. 2d 1255 (1st DCA 2006). Accordingly, we are constrained to affirm the JCC’s award of a reasonable attorney’s fee based on the statutory guideline formula. See Wood v. Fla. Rock Indus., 929 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006), granting motion for certification, 929 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006).
As in Wood, Lundy, and Campbell, we certify the following as a question of great public importance:
DO THE AMENDED PROVISIONS OF SECTION 440.34(1), FLORIDA STATUTES (2003), CLEARLY AND UNAMBIGUOUSLY ESTABLISH THE PERCENTAGE FEE FORMULA PROVIDED THEREIN AS THE SOLE STANDARD FOR DETERMINING THE REASONABLENESS OF AN ATTORNEY’S FEE TO BE AWARDED A CLAIMANT?
We AFFIRM the JCC’s order on trial attorney’s fees and costs and DENY the motion for appellate attorney’s fees. The issues on cross-appeal are affirmed.
WOLF, LEWIS, and THOMAS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Lundy v. Four Seasons Ocean Grand Palm Beach & Liberty Ins. Grp., 932 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)
- Wood v. Fla. Rock Indus. & Crawford & Co., 929 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)
- Barney E. Tully, Jr. v. State, 933 So. 2d 1255 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)