v. Limith, CASE NO. 1D13-5357

CourtCourt of Appeal of Florida (US)
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM.
PartiesF.T.M.I. OPERATOR, LLC, and UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE CO., Petitioners, v. ANNE MARIE LIMITH, Respondent.
Decision Date09 June 2014
Docket NumberCASE NO. 1D13-5357

F.T.M.I. OPERATOR, LLC, and UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE CO., Petitioners,
v.
ANNE MARIE LIMITH, Respondent.

CASE NO. 1D13-5357

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

Date of Accident: June 26, 2011
June 9, 2014


NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

Petition for Writ of Certiorari - Original Jurisdiction.

William H. Rogner and Andrew R. Borah of Hurley, Rogner, Miller, Cox, Waranch & Westcott, P.A., Winter Park, for Petitioners.

Bill McCabe, Longwood, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The Employer/Carrier (E/C) in this workers' compensation case filed a petition for writ of certiorari to review a non-final order of the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) denying its motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution under section 440.25(4)(i),

Page 2

Florida Statutes (2011). The motion followed the E/C's unsuccessful motion to compel Claimant to file a verified motion for attorney's fees under Florida Administrative Code Rule 60Q-6.124(4) and was filed one day after the statute of limitations would have run in this matter but for the JCC's reservation of jurisdiction over a claim for attorney's fees asserted in a petition for benefits (PFB) that was otherwise resolved in January 2012.

The E/C argues that it is irreparably harmed because the denial of its motion to dismiss the pending claim for attorney's fees and costs has "forever stripped" its right to assert the statute of limitations. See Black v. Tomoka State Park, 106 So. 3d 973 (Fla 1st DCA 2013) (reaffirming rule set forth in Longley v. Miami-Dade Cnty. Sch. Bd., 82 So. 3d 1098 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013), that pending claims asserted via PFB for attorney's fees and costs toll statute of limitations). The E/C, however, failed to present any compelling authority indicating it cannot raise and maintain a statute of limitations defense for all benefits that Claimant might later claim (including the at-issue claim for attorney's fees) based on its position that the JCC erred in denying the motion to dismiss. In fact, precedent from this court would indicate otherwise.* See

Page 3

Orange Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. Perkins, 619 So. 2d 1, 2 n.1 (Fla....

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT