Coney v. International Minerals & Chemical Corp., 82-213
| Decision Date | 14 January 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 82-213,82-213 |
| Citation | 425 So.2d 171 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
| Parties | Kathy CONEY, Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL MINERALS & CHEMICAL CORPORATION, Appellee. |
Charles L. Carlton of Carlton & Carlton, P.A., and Kenneth C. Glover, Lakeland, and J. Blayne Jennings, Gifford, for appellant.
Julian Clarkson and M. David Alexander of Holland & Knight, Tampa, for appellee.
Tony Coney died in 1979 as a result of an industrial accident at International Minerals and Chemical Corporation (IMC) where he was employed. Coney's widow, Kathy, on behalf of herself and her children accepted benefits under the Workers' Compensation Act, chapter 440, Florida Statutes. Thereafter, she filed suit alleging that her husband's death resulted from IMC's culpable negligence and sought compensatory and punitive damages. She assailed the constitutionality of the Act as applied to her and her children. The trial court upheld the constitutionality of the Act and held that it precluded an award of either compensatory or punitive damages against the decedent's employer, IMC. The court entered a final summary judgment in favor of IMC, and this appeal ensued.
Appellant first urges that the Workers' Compensation Act is unconstitutional. There is no merit to such contention and it does not warrant further discussion. Mullarkey v. Florida Feed Mills, Inc., 268 So.2d 363 (Fla.1972), appeal dismissed, 411 U.S. 944, 93 S.Ct. 1923, 36 L.Ed.2d 406 (1973). Even assuming the constitutionality of the Act, insofar as it prevents her from recovering compensatory damages, appellant next argues that she may maintain a separate action seeking punitive damages for the alleged culpable negligence of IMC. We disagree.
Appellant cites Nales v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 398 So.2d 455 (Fla. 2d DCA), petition for review denied, 408 So.2d 1092 (Fla.1981), as support for her position. Her reliance is misplaced. In Nales we held that where a plaintiff injured in an automobile accident is denied recovery of compensatory damages solely because the plaintiff did not cross the no-fault threshold, an award of punitive damages is nevertheless allowable if otherwise appropriate. Nales did not recognize a separate action for punitive damages. More importantly, Nales has no applicability here. To allow appellant to sue her late husband's employer, IMC, after she has accepted compensation benefits would be contrary to the exclusiveness of remedy doctrine embodied in the workers' compensation law.
Section 440.11(1), Florida Statutes, states:
The liability of an employer prescribed in s. 440.10 shall be exclusive and in place of all other liability of such employer to any third-party tortfeasor and to the employee, the legal representative thereof, husband or wife, parents, dependents, next of kin, and anyone otherwise entitled to recover damages from such employer at law or in admiralty on account of such injury or death ....
As we explained in Chorak v. Naughton, 409 So.2d 35, 38 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981):
The purpose of the exclusiveness of the Workers' Compensation Act is to limit the liability of the contributing employer to the compensation benefits secured. In return for accepting vicarious liability for all work-related injuries and for surrendering traditional defenses, the employer is allowed to treat compensation as a routine cost without exposure to tort litigation. Likewise, the employee relinquishes his tort remedies for a system of compensation sparing him the cost, delay, and uncertainty of litigation.
Appellant's contention that IMC's culpable negligence entitled her to punitive damages, regardless of her being barred from...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Schwartz v. Zippy Mart, Inc.
...429 (Fla.1978). See also Brown v. Winn-Dixie Montgomery, Inc., 469 So.2d 155 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Coney v. International Minerals & Chemical Corporation, 425 So.2d 171 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1983). ERVIN, Chief Judge, Although the trial court, as the majority has acknowledged, did not specifically r......
-
Brown v. Winn-Dixie Montgomery, Inc.
...distinction. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company v. Smith, 359 So.2d 427, 429 (Fla.1978). See also Coney v. International Minerals & Chemical Corporation, 425 So.2d 171 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1983). Appellants next contend that since Blaich's actions constitute intentional torts, the incident which......
-
Vallejos v. Lan Cargo S.A.
...166, 167 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Cunningham, 658 So.2d 556, 557 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); Coney v. Int'l Minerals & Chem. Corp., 425 So.2d 171, 171–72 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). Not only did Vallejos file an initial petition, but he filed six supplemental petitions. Professional and......
-
Connolly v. Maryland Cas. Co.
...the exclusiveness of remedy provision precludes an injured employee's spouse from recovery also. See Coney v. Int'l Minerals & Chem. Corp., 425 So.2d 171, 172 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983). The cases reflect the existing law of Florida, even though Florida does recognize a cause of action for inte......