American Woodmark Co. v. Sipe

District Court of Appeal of Florida

American Woodmark Co. v. Sipe

117 So. 3d 70, 2013 WL 3013577, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 9531

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 18, 2013·No. No. 1D12-4838·Published·Cited by 1 cases

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

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.

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

Pincite

117 So. 3d 70 (American Woodmark Co. v. Sipe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related