Orange County Fire Rescue v. Antonelli, 1D00-3411.
Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
Writing for the Court | WEBSTER, J. |
Citation | 794 So.2d 758 |
Parties | ORANGE COUNTY FIRE RESCUE and Johns Eastern Company, Inc., Appellants/Cross-Appellees, v. Anthony D. ANTONELLI, Appellee/Cross-Appellant. |
Docket Number | No. 1D00-3411.,1D00-3411. |
Decision Date | 26 September 2001 |
794 So.2d 758
ORANGE COUNTY FIRE RESCUE and Johns Eastern Company, Inc., Appellants/Cross-Appellees,v.
Anthony D. ANTONELLI, Appellee/Cross-Appellant
No. 1D00-3411.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
September 26, 2001.
Geoffrey Bichler, Winter Park; Bill McCabe, Longwood, for Appellee/Cross-Appellant.
EN BANC
WEBSTER, J.
In this workers' compensation appeal, the employer and servicing agent challenge the exclusion of permanent total disability supplemental benefits from the initial offset calculation mandated by Escambia County Sheriff's Department v. Grice, 692 So.2d 896 (Fla.1997), which holds that workers may not receive benefits from their employer and other collateral sources in excess of their average weekly wage. On cross-appeal, the claimant argues that the judge of compensation claims erred in allowing the employer and servicing agent to take the offset retroactively to the date of the Grice decision. Alternatively, the claimant asserts that even if the employer and servicing agent were allowed to take a retroactive offset, the amount of the offset was miscalculated. We affirm on all issues. However, our affirmance on the first issue requires us to recede en banc from prior decisions of this court.
I.
After sustaining a compensable back injury, the claimant was accepted as permanently and totally disabled on January 8, 1997. The parties stipulated that the appropriate date of accident for calculating permanent total disability benefits was January 29, 1996. Based on this date of accident, the claimant's average weekly wage was $913.63, resulting in a compensation rate of $465.00 per week. The claimant also initially received $14.00 in supplemental benefits.
On October 15, 1999, the employer and servicing agent asserted the right to take a Grice offset retroactively to May 1, 1997, the date of the Grice decision. The employer and servicing agent calculated the offset as follows:
Compensation rate $ 465.00 Social security disability $ 273.81 State disability retirement $ 340.75 Supplemental benefits $ 14.00 _________ Total benefits $1,093.56 Average weekly wage - $ 913.63 _________ Offset $ 179.93The claimant challenged both the inclusion of supplemental benefits in the offset calculation and the retroactive assertion of the offset.
The judge of compensation claims held that the employer and servicing agent were entitled to assert the offset retroactively to May 1, 1997, and that the offset calculation was correct except for the inclusion of the initial amount of supplemental benefits. This appeal and cross-appeal follow.
II.
On appeal, the employer and servicing agent argue that the judge of compensation claims erred in ruling that the initial amount of supplemental benefits should not be included in the Grice offset calculation. At least two decisions of this court unequivocally support their position. HRS Dist. II v. Pickard, 778 So.2d 299 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), approved on...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Childers v. State
...So.2d 199 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (en banc decision released without antecedent publication of panel decision); Orange County Fire Rescue v. Antonelli, 794 So.2d 758 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (en banc decision released without antecedent publication of panel decision); Jones v. State, 790 So.2d 1194 ......
-
Childers v. State
...So.2d 199 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (en banc decision released without antecedent publication of panel decision); Orange County Fire Rescue v. Antonelli, 794 So.2d 758 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (en banc decision released without antecedent publication of panel decision); Jones v. State, 790 So.2d 1194 ......
-
St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. MARINA BAY RESORT CONDOMINIUM ASSOC., …
...constitutional matter, requiring lawyers to associate co-counsel is the type of practice restriction that ordinarily falls to our supreme 794 So.2d 758 court to impose. Under Article V, section 15, of the Florida Constitution, the Supreme Court of Florida has "exclusive jurisdiction to regu......
-
Miami-Dade County v. Lovett, 1D03-4547.
...sources, in this case, FRS benefits, and subtracting 100% of the AWW from the total. See Orange County Fire Rescue v. Antonelli, 794 So.2d 758 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (en banc). This means a claimant's benefits would not be reduced through an offset unless he was receiving at least 100% of AWW.......