Pizza Hut of America, Inc. v. Miller, 95-03695
| Citation | 674 So.2d 178 |
| Decision Date | 22 May 1996 |
| Docket Number | No. 95-03695,95-03695 |
| Parties | 21 Fla. L. Weekly D1237 PIZZA HUT OF AMERICA, INC., Appellant, v. Richard MILLER, as personal representative of the Estate of Nancy Miller, Deceased, and ADT Security Systems, Mid-South, Inc., a/k/a ADT Security Systems, Inc., Appellees. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
Bonita L. Kneeland of Fowler, White, Gillen, Boggs, Villareal & Banker, P.A., Tampa, for Appellant.
Stuart C. Markman, James E. Felman and Susan H. Freemon of Kynes, Markman & Felman, P.A., Tampa, for Appellee Richard Miller.
Having reviewed the applicable law concerning the order on appeal, which is the denial of appellant's motion for summary judgment on the basis of workers' compensation immunity, it appears that this court is without jurisdiction to consider this appeal.
Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(vi) will allow an appeal from such a nonfinal order where the order finds "that a party is not entitled to workers' compensation immunity as a matter of law." The court here did not find that appellant was not entitled to workers' compensation immunity as a matter of law. Rather, the court here very specifically made no determination as to entitlement to workers' compensation immunity. This was because the factual applicability of workers' compensation immunity to the case had not been established.
The order here, in denying appellant's motion for summary judgment on this issue, stated specifically: "There are factual questions that must be submitted to the jury on the issue of the workers' compensation immunity." The transcript of the summary judgment hearing reveals that the issues the court wished to submit to the jury concerned whether the worker, Nancy Miller, was, in fact, acting within the scope of her employment at the time of her murder or had she ceased her employment activities and begun acting in regard to purely personal matters. Her actions are disputed, not their import. It is clear that in denying the motion for summary judgment, the court was attempting to determine whether the doctrine of workers' compensation immunity applied to the case at all.
The resolution of the question of law of the application of the doctrine of workers' compensation immunity depends first on the determination of the parties' disputed version of the facts as to what Mrs. Miller was doing at the time of her murder. The parties do not dispute the application of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hastings v. Demming
...dicta). We determine, however, that our jurisdictional approach is consistent with our recent opinion in Pizza Hut of America, Inc. v. Miller, 674 So.2d 178 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996), in which we clearly confronted the issue of whether we had jurisdiction under rule 9.130(a)(3)(C)(vi) to review a ......
-
Martin Electronics, Inc. v. Glombowski
...681 So.2d 786 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Hastings v. Demming, 682 So.2d 1107 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996) (Hastings I ); and Pizza Hut of America, Inc. v. Miller, 674 So.2d 178 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996), rev. granted, 683 So.2d 484 Generally, these cases involved appeals of orders which denied motions for summary......
-
Gustafson's Dairy, Inc. v. Phiel
...motion for summary judgment raising workers' compensation immunity even though issues of fact remain), with Pizza Hut of America, Inc. v. Miller, 674 So.2d 178 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996), and Hastings v. Demming, 21 Fla. L. Weekly D1756, D1757, --- So.2d ----, ---- (Fla. 2d DCA July 31, 1996) (the ......
-
Walton Dodge Chrysler-Plymouth Jeep and Eagle, Inc. v. H.C. Hodges Cash & Carry, Inc.
...at 1757. American Television and Communication Corp. v. Florida Power Corp., 679 So.2d 1190 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Pizza Hut of Am., Inc. v. Miller, 674 So.2d 178 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). Contra Breakers Palm Beach, Inc. v. Gloger, 646 So.2d 237 (Fla. 4th DCA One fact on which the majority seems to......