Miami-Dade County v. Aravena, 3D03-2482.

• Decision Date: 10 November 2004
• Docket Number: No. 3D03-2482.,3D03-2482.
• Citation: 886 So.2d 303
• Parties: MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, Appellant, v. Julio ARAVENA, the husband and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Gregoria Vega, deceased, Appellee.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

886 So.2d 303

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, Appellant, v. Julio ARAVENA, the husband and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Gregoria Vega, deceased, Appellee.

No. 3D03-2482.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

November 10, 2004.

Robert A. Ginsburg, Miami-Dade County Attorney, and Jeffrey P. Ehrlich, Assistant County Attorney, for appellant.

Feiler, Leach & McCarron and Martin E. Leach, Coral Gables, for appellee. Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and LEVY, and WELLS, JJ.

WELLS, Judge.

Miami-Dade County appeals from an order denying its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, claiming that this wrongful death action is barred by workers' compensation immunity. Because we agree that the "unrelated works" exception to workers' compensation immunity does not apply to this case, we reverse.

The decedent, Gregoria Vega, was employed by the County's police department as a part-time school crossing guard at the intersection of Southwest 16th Street and 62nd Avenue. On October 24, 2001, two vehicles — one traveling northbound, the other eastbound — collided in the intersection. One of the vehicles veered off the road killing Vega. At the time of the accident, the traffic lights at the intersection were not operating properly.

Julio Aravena, Vega's husband, subsequently brought a wrongful death suit alleging that Vega's death was caused, in part, by the negligence of County traffic signal repair personnel who failed to timely repair the malfunctioning traffic light. The County sought to avoid liability claiming that Aravena's action was barred by that portion of Florida's Workers' Compensation Law which accords tort immunity to employers and co-employees "acting in furtherance of the employer's business." § 440.11(1), Fla. Stat. (2001). The trial court disagreed with the County, finding that Aravena's claim fell within the "unrelated works" exception to the co-workers' immunity provision. Id. (stating that co-worker immunity is not "applicable to employees of the same employer when each is operating in furtherance of the employer's business but they are assigned primarily to unrelated works"). We disagree.

In Taylor v. Sch. Bd. of Brevard County, 29 Fla. L. Weekly S421, S422, ___ So.2d ___, ___, 2004 WL 1846219 (Fla. Aug. 19, 2004), the Florida Supreme Court concluded that the "unrelated works" exception to workers' compensation immunity was to be interpreted narrowly and "applied only when it can clearly be demonstrated that a fellow employee whose actions caused the injury was engaged in works unrelated to the duties of the injured employee." Applying this principle and test to the facts therein, the Supreme Court found that the duties of a school bus attendant — who was injured when the wheelchair lift affixed to a school bus fell on him — were related to the duties of the school bus mechanic who maintained the bus because the attendant and the mechanic "had in common the provision of transportation services to Brevard County school children." Id. In reaching this decision, the Supreme Court approved the Fifth District Court of Appeal's determination that the co-employees were involved in the "same project," finding that the holding "comport[ed] with the overall legislative intent of the Florida Workers' Compensation Law, because the law was meant to systematically resolve nearly every workplace injury case on behalf of both the employee and the employer." Id.; see also Sanchez v. Dade County Sch. Bd., 784 So.2d 1172, 1173 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001),

review granted, 819 So.2d 139 (Fla.2002) (finding no exception from co-worker immunity for school security personnel who failed to protect a...