Fournigault v. Jackson Memorial Hospital Standard Acc. Ins. Co.

Decision Date18 April 1956
Citation87 So.2d 102
PartiesMadelline FOURNIGAULT, Petitioner, v. JACKSON MEMORIAL HOSPITAL STANDARD ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, and FloridaIndustrial Commission, Respondents.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

Nichols, Gaither, Green, Frates & Beckham and Dudley Burton, Miami, for petitioner.

Douglas M. Carlton, Dixon, DeJarnette, Bradford & Williams, Miami, Burnis T. Coleman and Rodney Durrance, Tallahassee, for respondents.

TERRELL, Justice.

At a hearing before the Deputy Commissioner held June 17, 1955, claimant was awarded compensation plus medical expenses, attorneys fees and court costs. July 6, 1955, 19 days after copies of said order were mailed to the parties, the employer-carrier filed application for review of Deputy's order but said application was not filed with the Commission at Tallahassee until July 8, 21 days after its entry. July 6, carrier filed carbon copy of application for review with Deputy Commissioner, 19 days after entry of said order but within 20 days provided by statute. The full Commission denied motion to dismiss application for review, holding that the copy of the application filed with the Deputy within 20 days complied with Rule 4 of the Commission.

We are confronted with a petition for certiorari to review the order of the full Commission vacating the order of the Deputy Commission with directions to make further investigation as he may deem necessary in the light of Hardy v. City of Tarpon Springs, Fla.1955, 81 So.2d 503.

Petitioner raises two questions, viz.: (1) Is filing a carbon copy of application for review with the Deputy Commissioner within the time required by the statute compliance with Sec. 440.25(4)(a) when the original is admittedly received in Tallahassee one day late? (2) May the Commission change the statute by rule, particularly Rule 4, the effect of which is to provide that filing with the Deputy shall constitute filing with the Commission at Tallahassee? Respondents also argue two questions, viz.: (1) Certiorari will not lie to review an order of the full Commission which vacates an order of the Deputy Commission and remands the cause for further consideration. (2) Same as (2) raised by petitioner.

Answering respondents' contention that constitutional or common law certiorari lies only to final judgments, decrees or orders, that the order of the full Commission is not such an order and being so petition for certiorari should be denied, it is enough to say that in our view the order of the full Commission denying the motion to dismiss was to all intents and purposes a final order as to the time within which application for review must be filed and met all requirements of the rule authorizing request for certiorari.

The pertinent part of Sec. 440.25(4)(a), Florida Statutes 1953 and 1955, F.S.A., is as follows:

'The compensation order * * * shall become final twenty days after the date copies * * * are mailed to the parties * * * unless within said time any interested party shall make and file with the commission at Tallahassee an application for a review thereof by the full commission. * * *'

The pertinent part of Rule 4(a) adopted by the Commission effective October 1, 1953, is as follows:

'Applications for review of decisions of Deputy Commissioners must be filed with the Commission at Tallahassee within twenty days after the date copies of the Deputy's orders are...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Chavarria v. Selugal Clothing, Inc., 1D00-3467.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • 3 Febrero 2003
    ...Compensation Act lies with the Legislature and not with the Industrial Commission or the court); Fournigault v. Jackson Mem'l Hosp. Standard Accident Ins. Co., 87 So.2d 102, 104 (Fla.1956) ("Workmen's compensation is statutory...."). For this reason, court decisions in the area of workers' ......
  • Wilkes & Pittman v. Pittman
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • 20 Febrero 1957
    ...challenge the authority to promulgate the rule, and to support their attack they cite our decision in Fournigault v. Jackson Memorial Hospital Standard Acc. Ins. Co., Fla., 87 So.2d 102. True we held in that case that the commission would not by rule or regulation supersede those defined by......
  • Leonard v. Cook & Pruitt Masonry, Inc.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • 19 Octubre 1960
    ...award had become final under the statute, the full commission was without authority to consider or amend it. Fourauthority v. Jackson Memorial Hospital, Fla.1956, 87 So.2d 102, and H. W. Sperry, Inc. v. Matthews, Fla.1954, 76 So.2d Section 440.28, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., is not applicable......
  • American Cas. Co. of Reading, Pa. v. All Florida Sur. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • 31 Octubre 1956
    ...own order after considering the case. The commission's order must be and is hereby quashed on the authority of Fournigault v. Jackson Memorial Hospital, Fla.1956, 87 So.2d 102, and Sperry v. Matthews, Fla.1954, 76 So.2d In deference to the full commission it should be pointed out that Fourn......

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