Sontag, Inc. v. Schreiber, BP-8
| Decision Date | 03 September 1987 |
| Docket Number | No. BP-8,BP-8 |
| Citation | 512 So.2d 1034,12 Fla. L. Weekly 2128 |
| Parties | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2128 SONTAG, INC., d/b/a National RV Liquidators and Auto Owners Insurance Company, Appellants, v. Leslie R. SCHREIBER, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Appeal from an order of Deputy Commissioner J. Paul Jones.
Brian E. Currie of Sanders, McEwan, Mims & Martinez, P.A., Orlando, for appellants.
O. John Alpizar, P.A., Palm Bay, and Bill McCabe, Orlando, for appellee.
AFFIRMED.
The deputy commissioner awarded claimant's attorney a fee of $40,000 because the employer/carrier acted in bad faith. One taking exception to this ruling, as with any lower tribunal decision where there is evidence tending to support the decision, is routinely confronted by the substantial evidence test, which is generally stated to be "such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind would accept as adequate to support a conclusion." DeGroot v. Sheffield, 95 So.2d 912, 916 (Fla.1957).
The test of competent substantial evidence as an appellate review criterion becomes most difficult to apply when the court considers whether it is overstepping its bounds and substituting its judgment for that of the lower tribunal or reweighing the evidence. However, when the result below is unconscionable, I have no fear that a court exceeds the bounds of appellate review in overturning such results. The conclusion in this case is an unconscionable one, deserving of reversal.
The attorney estimated that he spent 47 to 50 hours on this case and the deputy commissioner accepted this time estimate. The deputy commissioner determined that the present value of benefits obtained was at least $300,000, but apparently less than the $374,000 estimated by claimant's attorney. The employer/carrier never contested any part of the claim, never appeared at any discovery proceedings or hearings on the compensation claim and never took exception to the deputy commissioner's rulings on the compensation claim. After the claimant presented a prima facie case for benefits, the matter was set for hearing on attorney fees. For the first time the employer/carrier appeared through counsel, admitted bad faith in the initial handling of the claim and asked the deputy commissioner to be reasonable in setting an attorney fee.
In support of the fee the deputy commissioner signed a substantially boilerplate order in which he made findings, some of which contradict the evidence of claimant's attorney (the only evidence presented) and others of which defy reason. The deputy commissioner concluded that anyone reviewing the case would think it routine and not difficult, but he knew the case was pretty tough. The claimant's attorney presented affidavits that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Foliage Design Systems, Inc. v. Fernandez
...514 So.2d 351 (Fla.1987); Samurai of the Falls, Inc. v. Sul, 509 So.2d 359 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Sontag, Inc., d/b/a National RV Liquidators v. Schreiber, 512 So.2d 1034 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); City of Orlando v. Desjardins, 493 So.2d 1027 (Fla.1986); Rivers v. SCA Services of Florida, Inc., 48......