Duff Hotel Co. v. Ficara
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
| Writing for the Court | Author: Terrell |
| Citation | 150 Fla. 442,7 So.2d 790 |
| Parties | DUFF HOTEL CO. et al. v. FICARA et al. |
| Decision Date | 28 April 1942 |
7 So.2d 790
150 Fla. 442
DUFF HOTEL CO. et al.
v.
FICARA et al.
Florida Supreme Court
April 28, 1942
[150 Fla. 443] Appeal from Circuit Court, Dade County; George E. Holt, judge. [7 So.2d 791]
McKay, Dixon & DeJarnette, of Miami, for appellants.
O. B. White and Walter Kehoe, all of Miami, for appellee Michael Ficara.
Walter Rountree, of Tallahassee, for appellee Florida Industrial Commission.
TERRELL, Justice.
In November, 1940, while in the employment of Duff Hotel Company, Michael Ficara sustained an inguinal hernia. His employer feeling that his injury was not covered by the Workmen's Compensation Act, Acts 1935, c. 17481, declined to pay compensation or medical expenses. The Deputy Industrial Commissioner held that he was entitled to four weeks' compensation and his hospital and doctors' bills incurred in repairing the hernia. This finding was affirmed by the Florida Industrial Commission and its judgment was in turn affirmed by the circuit court on appeal. This appeal is from the latter judgment.
The question presented is whether or not Ficara's injury was such as entitled him to compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act of Florida.
[150 Fla. 444] It is admitted that Ficara was acting within the scope of his employment, that his injury resulted from lifting a heavy pot of meat, that he had lifted the pot before and that lifting it was in the line of his duty. Appellant contends that since Ficara did not slip or fall or experience anything unusual in the way of an untoward accident in lifting the pot of meat, he is not within the protection of the Workmen's Compensation Act.
The applicable provision of the Workmen's Compensation Act is Section 15(f) as follows:
'Hernia: In all claims for compensation for hernia resulting from injury by an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment it must be definitely proved to the satisfaction of the Commission.
'1. That there was an injury resulting in hernia.
'2. That the hernia appeared suddenly.
'3. That it was accompanied by pain.
'4. That the hernia immediately followed an accident.
'5. That the hernia did not exist prior to the accident for which compensation is claimed.'
The question here turns on the interpretation of what is meant by hernia 'resulting from injury by an accident' or 'immediately followed an accident'. Appellant contends that the Florida Workmen's Compensation Act having been adopted from the Georgia Act,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Zundell v. Dade County School Bd., No. 91-1848
...cause is unknown. See, e.g., Victor Wine, supra; Gray v. Employers Mut. Liab. Ins. Co., 64 So.2d 650 (Fla.1952); Duff Hotel Co. v. Ficara, 150 Fla. 442, 7 So.2d 790 (1942). The majority does not seriously dispute the proposition that claimant suffered an "accident," as thus defined. Likewis......
-
Gray v. Employers Mut. Liability Ins. Co.
...ordinary work in the usual manner, these decisions are hereby modified, and we re-affirm the rule laid down in Duff Hotel Co. v. Ficara, 150 Fla. 442, 7 So.2d 790, that an unexpected injury received in the ordinary performance of a duty in the usual manner is an injury 'by accident' within ......
-
Purity Biscuit Co. v. Industrial Commission, 7096
...of Hamden, 129 Conn. 432, 29 A.2d 772; McCormick Lumber Co. v. Department of Labor, 7 Wash.2d 40, 108 P. 2d 807; Duff Hotel Co. v. Ficara, 150 Fla. 442, 7 So.2d 790; Hardware Mutual Casualty Co. v. Sprayberry, 195 Ga. 393, 24 S.E.2d 315." To this effect see the recent case of Rivard v. J. F......
-
Travelers Indem. Co. v. PCR INC., No. SC03-630.
...events,' but also injuries or damage neither expected nor intended from the standpoint of the insured."); Duff Hotel Co. v. Ficara, 150 Fla. 442, 7 So.2d 790, 792 (1942) ("`Accident' is not a technical legal term with a well bounded meaning. In Workmen's Compensation it has been applied to ......
-
Zundell v. Dade County School Bd., No. 91-1848
...cause is unknown. See, e.g., Victor Wine, supra; Gray v. Employers Mut. Liab. Ins. Co., 64 So.2d 650 (Fla.1952); Duff Hotel Co. v. Ficara, 150 Fla. 442, 7 So.2d 790 (1942). The majority does not seriously dispute the proposition that claimant suffered an "accident," as thus defined. Likewis......
-
Gray v. Employers Mut. Liability Ins. Co.
...ordinary work in the usual manner, these decisions are hereby modified, and we re-affirm the rule laid down in Duff Hotel Co. v. Ficara, 150 Fla. 442, 7 So.2d 790, that an unexpected injury received in the ordinary performance of a duty in the usual manner is an injury 'by accident' within ......
-
Purity Biscuit Co. v. Industrial Commission, 7096
...of Hamden, 129 Conn. 432, 29 A.2d 772; McCormick Lumber Co. v. Department of Labor, 7 Wash.2d 40, 108 P. 2d 807; Duff Hotel Co. v. Ficara, 150 Fla. 442, 7 So.2d 790; Hardware Mutual Casualty Co. v. Sprayberry, 195 Ga. 393, 24 S.E.2d 315." To this effect see the recent case of Rivard v. J. F......
-
Travelers Indem. Co. v. PCR INC., No. SC03-630.
...events,' but also injuries or damage neither expected nor intended from the standpoint of the insured."); Duff Hotel Co. v. Ficara, 150 Fla. 442, 7 So.2d 790, 792 (1942) ("`Accident' is not a technical legal term with a well bounded meaning. In Workmen's Compensation it has been applied to ......