Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Compensation Procedure, In re

Decision Date09 November 1995
Docket NumberNo. 86035,86035
Citation664 So.2d 945
Parties20 Fla. L. Weekly S565 In re AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA RULES OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROCEDURE.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court
Original Proceeding--Florida Rules of Workers' Compensation Procedure.

John F. Harkness, Jr., Executive Director, The Florida Bar, Tallahassee, for Petitioner.

Frederic M. Schott, pro se, Orlando; Honorable John J. Lazzara, Judge of Compensation Claims, Florida Department of Labor and Employment Security, Tallahassee; Dennis M. Usdan, pro se, Plantation; Annemarie Craft, Counsel for Special Disability Trust Fund, Florida Department of Labor and Employment Security, Tallahassee; Clark W. Berry, pro se, of the Law Offices of Vernis & Bowling of Southwest Florida, P.A., Fort Myers; and Honorable E. Earle Zehmer, Chief Judge, First District Court of Appeal, Tallahassee, Responding.

WELLS, Justice.

This matter is before the Court upon a report filed by the Workers' Compensation Rules Committee of The Florida Bar recommending emergency amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Compensation Procedure. We have jurisdiction pursuant to article V, section 2(a) of the Florida Constitution. Upon the request of the chief judge of the First District Court of Appeal, we have considered those portions of the proposed amendments relating to appellate proceedings, to which there is no opposition, and we approve them.

Accordingly, part B of the Florida Rules of Workers' Compensation Procedure is amended and adopted as reflected in the appendix to this opinion. New language is indicated by underscoring; deleted language is indicated by overstriking. Committee comments are included for explanation and guidance only and are not adopted as an official part of the rules. These amendments shall take effect upon the release of this opinion.

No motion for rehearing shall be entertained.

It is so ordered.

GRIMES, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, KOGAN, HARDING and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.

APPENDIX

PART [DELETED: B] [ADDED: II]. APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS

[ADDED: RULE 4.156. APPLICABILITY. Appellate review proceedings in workers' compensation cases shall be governed by the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure (civil) except as otherwise provided by these rules.]

Committee Notes

[ADDED: 1995 Amendment. This is a new rule clarifying that the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, with the exception of the rules set forth below, govern workers' compensation appellate review. With this clarification certain rules have been completely deleted because they were unnecessary or duplicative of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. The rules deleted in their entirety and their appellate rules counterparts [in brackets] are Rules 4.180(e) [9.200(f)(2) ], 4.225 [9.210(g) ], 4.240 [9.320], 4.250 [9.330], 4.255 [9.331], 4.260 [9.340]. Rule 4.270 has now been rewritten as Rule 4.156.]

RULE 4.160. APPELLATE JURISDICTION

(a) Jurisdiction of District Court.

[ADDED: (1)] The district court [DELETED: may] [ADDED: shall] review by appeal any final order of a judge [DELETED: .] [ADDED: and any nonfinal order of a judge that adjudicates:]

[ADDED: (A) jurisdiction;]

[ADDED: (B) venue; or]

[ADDED: (C) compensability, provided that the order expressly finds an injury occurred within the scope and course of employment and that the claimant is entitled to receive causally related benefits in some amount, and provided further that the judge certifies in the order that determination of the exact nature and amount of benefits due to the claimant will require substantial expense and time.]

[ADDED: (2) Jurisdiction of the district court shall be invoked by filing a notice of appeal under these rules within 30 days of the date the order to be reviewed is mailed by the judge to the parties, which date shall be the date of rendition.]

[DELETED: (b) Discretionary Jurisdiction: The district court also may review any nonfinal order of a judge that adjudicates the following:]

[DELETED: (1) Jurisdiction.]

[DELETED: 2) Venue.]

[DELETED: (3) Compensability of accidents or occupational diseases.]

[DELETED: (4) Insurance coverage.]

[DELETED: (5) Discovery matters when it appears the judge's order will cause a party irreparable harm and there is no adequate remedy at law to rectify such harm.]

[DELETED: (c) Commencement. Jurisdiction of the district court shall be invoked by filing a notice of appeal under these rules within 30 days after the order to be reviewed is mailed to the parties.]

[DELETED: (d) Record: Review. Unless ordered by the district court, the record on appeal of a nonfinal order shall be limited to those items set forth in rule 4.180(b).]

[DELETED: (e) Briefs: Discretionary Review. The appellant's initial brief in an appeal of a nonfinal order, accompanied by an appendix as prescribed by rule 4.180(b)(2), shall be filed with the notice of appeal.]

([DELETED: f] [ADDED: b+]) Jurisdiction of Judge Divested. Except as provided for in these rules, the judge shall have no further jurisdiction over issues raised in the appeal.

([DELETED: g] [ADDED: c]) Jurisdiction of Judge: [ADDED: Substantive] Issues [DELETED: Not Affected]. [DELETED: While on appeal, t] The judge retains jurisdiction to [ADDED: decide] the issues that have not been [ADDED: adjudicated and are not the subject of pending appellate review.]

([DELETED: h] [ADDED: d]) Jurisdiction of Judge [ADDED: : Procedural Matters]. During the pendency of an appeal, the judge retains jurisdiction to:

(1) supervise the preparation of the record on appeal, including the costs of preparation;

(2) [ADDED: extend the] [DELETED: grant extensions of] time for filing the record [ADDED: up to 30 days] as allowed under these rules. [ADDED: Any further extensions may be granted by the district court];

(3) correct clerical errors at any time before the record is filed with the district court; [ADDED: and]

(4) [DELETED: determine if appellate issues have been abandoned.] [ADDED: at any time before the record on appeal is filed with the district court under rule 4.180(i), approve settlements or correct clerical errors in the order appealed.]

([DELETED: i] [ADDED: e]) Discretionary [DELETED: Divestment] [ADDED: Relinquishment of Jurisdiction] by District Court. In cases in which the judge no longer has jurisdiction, the district court may [ADDED: relinquish jurisdiction to] permit the judge [DELETED: to proceed] to adjudicate specifically designated matters.

([DELETED: j] [ADDED: f]) [DELETED: Discretionary Divestment to Consider] Settlement.

[DELETED: (1) Investigation. On stipulation of the parties, the judge may investigate the efficacy of a proposed settlement, either in whole or in part, of issues on appeal.]

(1) [DELETED: Remand by District Court] [ADDED: If after the record on appeal is filed, settlement is reached, the parties shall file a] [DELETED: On] joint motion [DELETED: of the parties] stating that a settlement has been reached [ADDED: and requesting relinquishment of jurisdiction to the judge for approval of the settlement by the judge.] [DELETED: ,] [ADDED: T] he district court may [DELETED: remand the cause] [ADDED: relinquish jurisdiction] to the judge [ADDED: for a specified period] for entry of an appropriate order. [ADDED: In the event the division has advanced the costs of preparing the record on appeal or the filing fee, a copy of the joint motion shall be furnished to the division by the appellant.]

[ADDED: (2) On or before the date specified in the order relinquishing jurisdiction, the parties shall file a joint notice of disposition of the settlement with a conformed copy of any order entered on the settlement.]

(3) [DELETED: Costs.] Any order approving a settlement shall provide where appropriate for the assessment and recovery of appellate costs including any costs incurred by the division for insolvent appellants.

[DELETED: (k) Concurrent Jurisdiction. Before the record on appeal is transmitted to the district court, the judge and the district court have concurrent jurisdiction to enter orders on procedural matters.]

[ADDED: (g) Other Review. Nothing in this rule shall be interpreted as precluding other original proceedings in the district court as provided in the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure.]

Committee Notes

1979 Adoption. This replaces rule 14, 1977 W.C.R.P. It derives, in part, from section 440.25(4)(f), Florida Statutes (1979); and rules 9.040(g), 9.110(b), and 9.900, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure (1979). The appeal period is extended from 20 days to 30 days, and assignment of error(s) is eliminated.

1980 Amendment. The Rules Committee of the Workers' Compensation Section of the Bar is in agreement with conforming workers' compensation appellate procedures with appellate procedures involving other litigation, whenever possible. In all instances in which a conformed procedure is possible no special rules should exist. However, in some regards workers' compensation cases are unique, and this uniqueness generates special needs for workers' compensation appeals not present in appeals involving other litigation. One of these is a need for the parties and the courts to know precisely what is on appeal in a workers' compensation case so that those issues not on appeal may be determined in separate proceedings, those pursuant to rule 20 (relating to proceedings before the deputy in regard to matters over which jurisdiction has not been divested by the filing of an appeal). The information concerning what is on appeal is necessary to avoid delay in the delivery of uncontested (on appeal) benefits to the claimant.

Workers' compensation cases, of necessity, are taken up piecemeal. A workers' compensation case requires this treatment because the various entitlements of the claimant (which generate potential issues to be heard by the deputy commissioner) mature at different times as the course of the claimant's physical recovery progresses. A workers' compensation case, unlike other...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Amendments to the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • November 22, 1996
    ...which set forth the appellate jurisdiction with respect to workers' compensation proceedings. In re Amendments to Florida Rules of Workers' Compensation Procedure, 664 So.2d 945 (Fla.1995). Consistent with the theme that all rules dealing with appellate review should be contained in the Rul......
  • AMEND. TO FLA. RULES OF APPELLATE PROC.
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • December 26, 1996
    ...which set forth the appellate jurisdiction with respect to workers' compensation proceedings. In re Amendments to Florida Rules of Workers' Compensation Procedure, 664 So.2d 945 (Fla. 1995). Consistent with the theme that all rules dealing with appellate review should be contained in the Ru......
  • AMENDMENTS TO RULES OF WORKERS'COMP. PROC.
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • December 2, 2004
    ...to the Florida Rules of Workers' Compensation Procedure, 674 So.2d 631, 631 (Fla.1996); In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Compensation Procedure, 664 So.2d 945, 945 (Fla.1995). 6. See Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Compensation Procedure, 829 So.2d 791, 791 (Fla......
  • Emro Marketing v. Schwier
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 1, 1996
    ...subject to the constraints of Rule 4.160(a)(1), Florida Rules of Workers' Compensation Procedure. In re Amendments to the Fla. R. Work. Comp. P., 664 So.2d 945, 946 (Fla.1995). In the present case, appellants argue only that the order on review is a final order. The order is final, Emro rea......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • The administrative process and constitutional principles.
    • United States
    • Florida Bar Journal Vol. 75 No. 1, January 2001
    • January 1, 2001
    ...2(a), but rather delegation of authority by statute). See also In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Compensation Procedure, 664 So. 2d 945 (Fla. (71) See Dept. of Health & Rehabilitative Services of State of Florida v. Crossdale, 585 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 4th D.C.A. 1991). (72) ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT