Sun Ins. Co. v. Boyd
| Decision Date | 10 October 1958 |
| Citation | 105 So.2d 574 |
| Parties | SUN INSURANCE COMPANY et al., Petitioners, v. George L. BOYD and Florida Industrial Commission, Respondents. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Davisson F. Dunlap and Adair, Ulmer, Murchison, Kent & Ashby, Jacksonville, for petitioners.
John E. Mathews, Jr., E. Robert Miller, Jr., and McNatt & Mathews, Jacksonville, for George L. Boyd.
Burnis T. Coleman, Tallahassee, for Florida Industrial Commission.
Petition for writ of certiorari was filed in this cause to review a decision of the District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District, 101 So.2d 419, denying certiorari in the case of a workmen's compensation award. This Court, on June 24, 1958, 104 So.2d 593, denied the petition for lack of jurisdiction under Article V, Sec. 4, of the Florida Constitution, F.S.A., and requested briefs on the question, presented for the first time by a motion in this cause, of awarding a claimant's attorney's fees for services in successfully resisting the application for the writ in such circumstances.
F.S. § 440.34, F.S.A., reads in part as follows:
'(1) * * * If any proceedings are had for review of any claim, award or compensation order before any court, the court may allow or increase the attorney's fees, in its discretion, which fees shall be in addition to the compensation paid the claimant, and shall be paid as the court may direct.'
From a superficial consideration of the matter there may be said to exist some doubt that this Court could exercise jurisdiction in the cause even to allow fees under the statute, for services of claimant's counsel in the proceeding here, in the face of its conclusion that certiorari must be denied under Article V, supra. The general principle that 'Upon determining that it has no jurisdiction, the court * * * should, refuse to * * * determine other * * * rights of the parties' (21 C.J.S. Courts § 118) is fully answered by the elementary proposition that a tribunal always has jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction. State ex rel. B. F. Goodrich Co. v. Trammell, 140 Fla. 500, 192 So. 175. Obviously when this Court makes a determination that the conditions essential to its exercise of jurisdiction under the Constitution do or do not exist, it thereby exercises an inherent power or jurisdiction. And, by invoking the statute to obtain fees under such circumstances, counsel is not in fact contending for an award of fees for services rendered in a proceeding over which the Court...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Peyton v. Nord
...of facts upon which its jurisdiction is based. Sunray DX Oil Co. v. Federal Power Com'n, 351 F.2d 395 (10th Cir. 1965); Sun Ins. Co. v. Boyd, 105 So.2d 574 (Fla.1958); Fox Park Timber Co. v. Baker, 53 Wyo. 467, 84 P.2d 736, 120 A.L.R. 1020 (1938); Strother v. Day, 279 S.W.2d 785 (Ky.1955); ......
-
Birth-Related Inj. Comp. v. Div. Of Admin.
...As established law provides, an ALJ must have jurisdiction to determine whether the ALJ has jurisdiction. See, e.g., Sun Ins. Co. v. Boyd, 105 So.2d 574, 575 (Fla.1958) (explaining that "a tribunal always has jurisdiction to determine its own Notably, in 2003, the Legislature amended the NI......
-
State v. Barati
...ex rel. Tabb v. Fla. Birth–Related Neurological Injury Comp. Ass'n, 880 So.2d 1253, 1257 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (quoting Sun Ins. Co. v. Boyd, 105 So.2d 574, 575 (Fla.1958) ) (“a tribunal always has jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction.”).On remand, the State moved to cancel the hear......
-
Congregation Temple De Hirsch of Seattle, Wash. v. Aronson
...Justice Hobson has referred to it as being 'apodictic.' Kent v. Marvin, Fla.1952, 59 So.2d 791, at page 792. Compare Sun Insurance Company v. Boyd, Fla.1958, 105 So.2d 574.5 Salinger v. Salinger, Fla.1958, 100 So.2d 393, 394.6 Cortina v. Cortina, Fla.1957, 98 So.2d 334.7 2 Fla.Jur. Appeals ......
-
Florida's third species of jurisdiction.
...but that is countered by the principle that every court has SMJ to determine whether it has jurisdiction. Sun Insurance Company v. Boyd, 105 So. 2d 574, 575 (11) Hughes v. State, 901 So. 2d 837 (Fla. 2005)("the importance of finality in any justice system ... cannot be understated.") One of......