Johnson v. Comet Steel Erection, Inc.
| Decision Date | 19 July 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 81-2179,81-2179 |
| Citation | 435 So.2d 908 |
| Parties | Charles JOHNSON, Appellant, v. COMET STEEL ERECTION, INC., and Reliance Insurance Company, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Mark J. Feldman, Miami, for appellant.
Paxton, Crow, Bragg & Austin and David Crow, West Palm Beach, for appellees.
Before BARKDULL, DANIEL S. PEARSON and FERGUSON, JJ.
Where appellant, an employee of the general contractor, was injured as a result of the ordinary negligence of the subcontractor's employee 1 while both were employed on-site in the same construction project, the fact that appellant was a common laborer for the general contractor and the tortfeasor was a welder for the subcontractor did not make their work "unrelated" 2 so that the immunity enjoyed by the subcontractor from suit by an employee of the general contractor would be inapplicable. While there is no direct precedent for determining what is related work under Section 440.11, Florida Statute (1981), several prior cases indicate the broad scope of immunity afforded a subcontractor for injuries to an employee of a general contractor. See Motchkavitz v. L.C. Boggs Industries, Inc., 407 So.2d 910 (Fla.1981); Younger v. Giller Contracting Co., 143 Fla. 335, 196 So. 690 (1940); Williams v. Corbett Cranes, Inc., 396 So.2d 811 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Aderhold v. Blair Contracting Company, Inc., 350 So.2d 550 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); Mack v. Cook & Pruitt Masonry, Inc., 186 So.2d 831 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966).
Affirmed.
1 Appellant concedes that the subcontractor is an employee of the general contractor so as to render applicable the fellow servant rule of Section 440.11, Florida Statute (1981). The sole issue on appeal is whether the subcontractor's work is related to the work of the general contractor's employee.
2 Parts of the applicable statutes relied upon by appellant provide:
440.10 Liability for compensation.--
In case a contractor sublets any part or parts of his contract work to a subcontractor or subcontractors, all of the employees of such contractor and subcontractor or subcontractors ... shall be deemed to be employed in one and the same business or establishment; and the contractor shall be liable for, and shall secure, the payment of compensation to all such employees....
440.11 Exclusiveness of liability.--
(1) The liability of an employer prescribed in s. 440.10 shall be exclusive and in place of all other liability of such...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Vause v. Bay Medical Center
...does not mean they are involved in "unrelated works." Abraham v. Dzafic, 666 So.2d 232 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Johnson v. Comet Steel Erection, Inc., 435 So.2d 908, 909 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). 2 In Johnson, the court Where appellant, an employee of the general contractor, was injured as a result of......
-
Aravena v. Miami-Dade County
...construction sites, which did not analyze the words used in the statute. See Abraham, 666 So.2d at 233; Johnson v. Comet Steel Erection, Inc., 435 So.2d 908, 909 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). In concluding that the unrelated works exception did not apply to coemployees who were "employed on-site in t......
-
Taylor v. School Bd. of Brevard County
...was the first to address the issue of the scope of the application of the unrelated works exception. In Johnson v. Comet Steel Erection, Inc., 435 So.2d 908 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), the court held, without any expanded explanation, that a common laborer for a general contractor and a welder for ......
-
Fitzgerald v. South Broward Hosp. Dist., 4D02-1092.
...754 So.2d 683 (Fla. 2000); Vause, 687 So.2d at 261-63; Abraham v. Dzafic, 666 So.2d 232 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Johnson v. Comet Steel Erection Co., 435 So.2d 908 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). 2. See, e.g., Lopez, 734 So.2d at ...
-
The "unrelated works" exception to workers' compensation immunity.
...of the same team or on the same project. The first case to consider the scope of the exception was Johnson v. Comet Steel Erection, Inc., 435 So. 2d 908 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). In that case, an employee of a general contractor was injured as a result of the negligence of an employee of a subcon......