American Woodmark Co. v. Sipe

117 So. 3d 70, 2013 WL 3013577, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 9531
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJune 18, 2013
DocketNo. 1D12-4838
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 117 So. 3d 70 (American Woodmark Co. v. Sipe) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
American Woodmark Co. v. Sipe, 117 So. 3d 70, 2013 WL 3013577, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 9531 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The “two-dismissal rule” is set forth in Florida Administrative Code Rule 60Q-6.116(2): “a second notice of voluntary dismissal shall operate as an adjudication of denial of any claim or petition for benefits previously the subject of a voluntary dismissal.” Appellants argue the Judge of Compensation Claims erred, in the order on appeal, by not applying the two-dismissal rule to the instant claim for permanent total disability benefits so as to bar the claim under principles of res judicata. We agree, and reverse the order to the extent it awards such benefits.

REVERSED in part, and AFFIRMED in part.

CLARK, MARSTILLER, and SWANSON, JJ„ concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ismael Moreno v. Palm Beach County School Board
146 So. 3d 530 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
117 So. 3d 70, 2013 WL 3013577, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 9531, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-woodmark-co-v-sipe-fladistctapp-2013.