Bell v. Univis, Inc.

Supreme Court of Florida

Bell v. Univis, Inc.

201 So. 2d 543, 1967 Fla. LEXIS 3680

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedJune 30, 1967

DocketNo. 35658

StatusPublished

This text of 201 So. 2d 543 (Bell v. Univis, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bell v. Univis, Inc., 201 So. 2d 543, 1967 Fla. LEXIS 3680 (Fla. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

THOMAS, Justice.

By petition for writ of certiorari we have for review an Order of the Florida Industrial Commission bearing the date of June 24, 1966, vacating and remanding the Deputy Commissioner’s Order awarding petitioner compensation for 70 per cent, loss of use of his right hand, which included compensation for 50 per cent, loss of use of the hand due to a condition pre-existing the industrial accident on December 11, 1964 of which the employer had knowledge. The cause was remanded for the entry of a new order readjusting compensation benefits due the petitioner pursuant to Section 440.-15(5) Florida Statutes, F.S.A., consistent with the views of the Full Commission.

We find that oral argument would serve no useful purpose and it is, therefore, dispensed with pursuant to Florida Appellate Rule 3.10, subd. e, 31 F.S.A.

[544]*544Our consideration of the petition, the record and briefs leads us to conclude that the Full Commission departed from the essential requirements of law.

The petition is, therefore, granted. The Order of the Full Commission is hereby quashed with directions to reinstate the Order of the Deputy Commissioner consistent with this court’s views in Dorsey v. L. A. Contracting Co., 155 So.2d 357 (Fla.1963) and Stephens v. Winn-Dixie, Fla., 201 So.2d 731.

THORNAL, C. J., and ROBERTS, DREW and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.

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

THOMAS, Justice.

By petition for writ of certiorari we have for review an Order of the Florida Industrial Commission bearing the date of June 24, 1966, vacating and remanding the Deputy Commissioner’s Order awarding petitioner compensation for 70 per cent, loss of use of his right hand, which included compensation for 50 per cent, loss of use of the hand due to a condition pre-existing the industrial accident on December 11, 1964 of which the employer had knowledge. The cause was remanded for the entry of a new order readjusting compensation benefits due the petitioner pursuant to Section 440.-15(5) Florida Statutes, F.S.A., consistent with the views of the Full Commission.

We find that oral argument would serve no useful purpose and it is, therefore, dispensed with pursuant to Florida Appellate Rule 3.10, subd. e, 31 F.S.A.

[544]*544Our consideration of the petition, the record and briefs leads us to conclude that the Full Commission departed from the essential requirements of law.

The petition is, therefore, granted. The Order of the Full Commission is hereby quashed with directions to reinstate the Order of the Deputy Commissioner consistent with this court’s views in Dorsey v. L. A. Contracting Co., 155 So.2d 357 (Fla.1963) and Stephens v. Winn-Dixie, Fla., 201 So.2d 731.

THORNAL, C. J., and ROBERTS, DREW and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

201 So. 2d 543, 1967 Fla. LEXIS 3680, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bell-v-univis-inc-fla-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack