Escambia County Sheriff's Dept. v. Grice
| Citation | 692 So.2d 896 |
| Decision Date | 01 May 1997 |
| Docket Number | No. 86327,86327 |
| Parties | 22 Fla. L. Weekly S234 ESCAMBIA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, et al., Petitioners, v. Thomas GRICE, Respondent. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Florida |
Mary E. Cruickshank of McConnaughhay, Roland, Maida & Cherr, Tallahassee, for Petitioners.
James F. McKenzie of McKenzie & Soloway, P.A., Pensacola, for Respondent.
David A. McCranie of David A. McCranie, P.A., Jacksonville, for amicus curiae State of Florida, Department of Insurance, Division of Risk Management.
Ellen Lorenzen and John R. Dixon of Barr, Murman, Tonelli, Herzfeld & Rubin, Tampa, for amicus curiae School Board of Hillsborough County.
Thomas H. McDonald of Rissman, Weisberg, Barrett, Hurt, Donahue & McLain, P.A., Orlando, for amicus curiae Orange County Board of County Commissioners.
Robert A. McMillan, County Attorney and Lonnie N. Groot, Deputy County Attorney, Sanford, for amicus curiae Seminole County, Florida.
Derrick E. Cox of Hurley & Rogner, P.A., Orlando, for amici curiae Brevard County Board of County Commissioners and Florida Community Colleges Risk Management Consortium.
Dennis A. Ross of Ross, Williams & Deal, P.A., Lakeland, for amicus curiae City of Lakeland.
Robert A. Ginsburg, Dade County Attorney and Thomas A. Tucker Ronzetti, Assistant County Attorney, Miami, for amicus curiae Metropolitan Dade County.
We have for review a decision ruling upon the following question certified to be of great public importance:
WHEN AN EMPLOYEE RECEIVES WORKERS' COMPENSATION, STATE DISABILITY RETIREMENT, AND SOCIAL SECURITY DISABILITY BENEFITS, IS THE EMPLOYER ENTITLED TO OFFSET AMOUNTS PAID TO THE EMPLOYEE FOR STATE DISABILITY RETIREMENT AND SOCIAL SECURITY DISABILITY AGAINST WORKERS' COMPENSATION BENEFITS TO THE EXTENT THAT THE COMBINED TOTAL OF ALL BENEFITS EXCEEDS THE EMPLOYEE'S AVERAGE WEEKLY WAGE?
Grice v. Escambia County Sheriff's Dep't, 658 So.2d 1208, 1211-12 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla.Const.
This case involves a disabled deputy sheriff, Thomas Grice, who was injured in January 1985, while employed by the Escambia County Sheriff's Department (the county). Thereafter, Grice received permanent total disability benefits pursuant to chapter 440 (Workers' Compensation Law), social security disability benefits, and state disability retirement benefits under the Florida State Retirement System. Grice's pre-injury average weekly wage (AWW) was determined to be $583.88. Before any offsets, Grice received $392.00 weekly in worker's compensation benefits; $167.36 weekly in state disability retirement benefits; and $163.85 weekly in social security disability benefits.
In June 1993, the county notified Grice that it was offsetting his permanent total disability benefits based upon the amount that his combined worker's compensation, state disability retirement, and social security disability benefits exceeded his AWW. Grice disputed the county's right to take the offset and sought repayment of the benefits withheld plus fees, costs, interest, and penalties. The Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) issued an order denying the claim and allowing the county to continue workers' compensation offsets to the extent that both social security benefits and pension benefits combined to exceed Grice's pre-injury AWW. In his order, the JCC acknowledged that there was no statute or case law authorizing an employer to "stack" all three benefits to compute an offset based upon a claimant's AWW. However, the JCC concluded that stacking the three benefits was permissible because the employer would be able to take an offset against compensation based on either social security or pension if one or the other was more generous.
The First District Court of Appeal reversed the JCC's decision and held that combining the three benefits for the purpose of allowing an offset was improper. The district court reasoned that no statutory authority or case law exists to support stacking disability retirement benefits with social security disability benefits to offset against workers' compensation, and the state retirement plan contains no offset provision. Grice, 658 So.2d at 1211. The district court also noted that the Workers' Compensation Law contains no offset provision for pension benefits, but it does provide an offset for social security benefits under section 440.15(9), Florida Statutes (1985), which states in pertinent part:
(a) Weekly compensation benefits payable under this chapter for disability resulting from injuries to an employee who becomes eligible for benefits under 42 U.S.C. s. 423 shall be reduced to an amount whereby the sum of such compensation benefits payable under this chapter and such total benefits otherwise payable for such period to the employee and his dependents, had such employee not been entitled to benefits under this chapter, under 42 U.S.C. ss. 423 and 402, does not exceed 80 percent of the employee's average weekly wage. However, this provision shall not operate to reduce an injured worker's benefits under this chapter to a greater extent than such benefits would have otherwise been reduced under 42 U.S.C. s. 424(a).
Because the legislature provided for a social security offset against workers' compensation benefits, but did not include an...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of Hollywood v. Lombardi, SC96482.
...offset upon section 440.20(15), Florida Statutes (1993), and this Court's decision in Escambia County Sheriffs Department v. Grice, 692 So.2d 896 (Fla. 1997). The other significant area of controversy that arose was whether the amount of the E/SA's lien should be capped at Lombardi's net re......
-
HRS DIST. II v. Pickard, 98-1097.
...and resulting offset arising under section 440.20(15), Florida Statutes (Supp.1986), and Escambia County Sheriffs Department v. Grice, 692 So.2d 896 (Fla.1997). The employer and its insurance carrier, HRS District II and Alexsis Risk Management (E/C), argue on appeal that the judge of compe......
-
Medina v. Miami Dade Cnty., 1D19-1410
...Statutes (1987), against the leave compensation paid is recognized.3 Id . at 1079 (citing Escambia Cty. Sheriff's Dep't v. Grice , 692 So. 2d 896, 898 (Fla. 1997) ). Specifically, while section 440.09(1) dictates an employer may not avoid paying workers’ compensation by offering alternative......
-
Dixon v. Pasadena Yacht & Country Club, 98-1064.
...source" subject to the 100 percent cap on average weekly wage (AWW) discussed in Escambia County Sheriff's Department v. Grice, 692 So.2d 896 (Fla.1997); (2) whether social security retirement benefits are a "collateral source" subject to the 100 percent AWW cap discussed in Grice; and (3) ......
-
Collateral offsets to workers' compensation benefits.
...weekly wage. Therefore, the employer's liability has the potential for being reduced. In Escambia County Sheriff's Department v. Grice, 692 So. 2d 896 (Fla. 1997), the Florida Supreme Court ruled that an employer/carrier may offset certain benefits paid to the claimant when the combination ......
-
The social security disability offset: a comprehensive review of statutory and case law guiding reduction in Florida workers' compensation benefits.
...in the calculation. (18) Effect of Receipt of Collateral Source Benefits and Increases In Escambia County Sheriff's Dept. v. Grice, 692 So. 2d 896 (Fla. 1997), Grice argued that he was entitled to workers' compensation and disability benefits, with the only offset being that which is statut......