Skip to main content

Jones v Royalty Food

This March 12, 2012 1DCA decision reversed a JCC decision of Judge Pitts.

The claimant argued that the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) erred in dismissing his petitions for benefits as a sanction for nonpayment of an earlier award of prevailing party costs to the Employer/Carrier. The claimant was indigent, unemployed, and homeless.

The JCC found that the claimant simply did not have the financial ability to pay the outstanding costs and that the claimant was not willfully refusing to comply with the Order Taxing cost.

The 1DCA  held that in exercising his or her discretion, the JCC may not dismiss a petition for benefits absent a specific finding that a party or its attorney has willfully refused to comply with an order. Based on the above, the 1DCA found that the JCC did not find that the claimant’s conduct was willful, deliberate or contumacious, and reversed the JCC decision.

Click to see 1DCA opinion
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

De la Cruz v Able Body Temporary Staffing

This March 6, 2012 1DCA opinion affirmed in part and reversed in part the JCC decision of Judge Sojourner. In this case, the claimant filed several petitions for benefits after injuring his right knee and left wrist in a workplace fall.  Among other things, Claimant sought authorization for a total knee replacement and TPD benefits related to the wrist injury that the Employer/Carrier had accepted as compensable.  The 1DCA held that the  JCC correctly held that the workplace accident was not the major contributing cause of Claimant’s need for knee surgery, and therefore, denied all related claims. The 1DCA affirmed that portion of the order. However, the 1DCA opined that the JCC did not rule on the TPD claim for the claimant's compensable wrist injury.  The 1DCA held that "Failure to rule on a fully tried issue is reversible error". To support their position, the 1 DCA cited the 1997 Betancourt v. Sears Roebuck & Co. Case.  The 1DCA...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is coronavirus compensable under WC?

According to the NCCI, The answer to that question is maybe. While WC laws provide compensation for “occupational diseases” that arise out of and in the course of employment, many state statutes exclude “ordinary diseases of life” (e.g., the common cold or flu). There are occupational groups that arguably would have a higher probability for exposure such as healthcare workers. However, even in those cases, there may be uncertainty as to whether the disease is compensable. Would time away from work during recovery be considered “temporary disability” or is it just normal “sick time”?    https://www.ncci.com/Articles/Pages/Insights-COVID19-WorkersComp.aspx
Post a Comment
Read more