Lane v. Workforce Bus. Servs., Inc.

Decision Date12 November 2014
Docket NumberNo. 1D14–0959.,1D14–0959.
Citation151 So.3d 537
PartiesPhillip S. LANE, Appellant, v. WORKFORCE BUSINESS SERVICES, INC. f/k/a Employee Leasing Solutions, Superior Coatings, Inc., and American Zurich Insurance Company, Appellees.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

151 So.3d 537

Phillip S. LANE, Appellant
v.
WORKFORCE BUSINESS SERVICES, INC. f/k/a Employee Leasing Solutions, Superior Coatings, Inc., and American Zurich Insurance Company, Appellees.

No. 1D14–0959.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Nov. 12, 2014.
Rehearing Denied Dec. 15, 2014.


151 So.3d 538

E. Taylor Davidson of DiCesare, Davidson & Barker, P.A., Lakeland, and Joshua M. Drechsel of Brumbelow Dreschel Law Group, Saint Petersburg, for Appellant.

H. George Kagan of Miller, Kagan, Rodriguez & Silver, P.L., West Palm Beach, for Appellees.

Opinion

151 So.3d 539

PER CURIAM.

In this workers' compensation case, Claimant appeals an order by the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) which denies an award of attorney's fees under section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2013), as well as the reimbursement of the costs of litigation associated with videotaping two depositions. Because we find that section 57.105 is not applicable to original proceedings in workers' compensation claims brought under chapter 440, we affirm the denial of attorney's fees. We reverse, however, the denial of costs because the JCC applied an improper standard in determining whether the costs of a videographer were taxable.

In this case, the Employer/Carrier (E/C) denied compensability of Claimant's accident and injuries, prompting Claimant to file a petition for benefits seeking a determination as to his entitlement to benefits under chapter 440. Extensive litigation ensued. One day before the scheduled final hearing on Claimant's petition, Claimant and the E/C entered into a stipulation whereby the E/C accepted compensability of the claim. As a part of the stipulation, the E/C agreed to the payment of litigation costs and a statutory guideline attorney's fee under section 440.34, Florida Statutes (2011). Claimant also claimed an additional attorney's fee under section 57.105, and the parties agreed that the JCC would decide issues relating to Claimant's entitlement to such fees.1 In the appealed order, the JCC denied the attorney's fees claimed under section 57.105, concluding that such fees were not awardable in workers' compensation proceedings before a JCC. The JCC also denied the entirety of the costs Claimant incurred in videotaping the depositions of two adverse witnesses who were instrumental in denying the compensability of the underlying claim.

The Florida Workers' Compensation Law, as set forth in Chapter 440, establishes the liability of an employer thereunder as exclusive and in place of all other liability to an injured employee. § 440.11, Fla. Stat. (2011). It is well-established that “[w]orkers' compensation is purely a creature of statute and, as such, is subject to the basic principles of statutory construction.” Sunshine Towing, Inc. v. Fonseca, 933 So.2d 594, 594–95 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (citing McDade v. Palm Beach Cnty. Sch. Distr., 898 So.2d 126, 128 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005), and Travelers Ins. Co. v. Sitko, 496 So.2d 920, 921 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) ); see also J.J. Murphy & Son, Inc. v. Gibbs, 137 So.2d 553, 562 (Fla.1962) (noting that workers' compensation “must be governed by what the statutes provide, not by what deciding authorities feel the law should be”). Chapter 440 does not provide the statutory authority for the application of section 57.105 —by either incorporation or indirect reference.2

151 So.3d 540
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • State v. Hodges
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • 12 Noviembre 2014
  • Paul v. Hosp. Housekeeping Sys., Ltd., 1D14–2672.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • 19 Diciembre 2014
    ...G. Jacobs of Sponsler, Bennett, Jacobs & Adams, P.A., Tampa, for Appellees.OpinionPER CURIAM.AFFIRMED. See Lane v. Workforce Bus. Servs., Inc., 151 So.3d 537 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).BENTON, WETHERELL, and SWANSON, JJ., ...

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