Diversified Development of Kansas City, Inc. v. Sanchez

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Diversified Development of Kansas City, Inc. v. Sanchez

90 So. 3d 337, 2012 WL 2054235, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 9209

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 8, 2012

DocketNo. 1D11-5170

StatusPublished

This text of 90 So. 3d 337 (Diversified Development of Kansas City, Inc. v. Sanchez) 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

Diversified Development of Kansas City, Inc. v. Sanchez, 90 So. 3d 337, 2012 WL 2054235, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 9209 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this workers’ compensation matter, Appellants argue that the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) erred on four counts, none of which have merit. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the issues on appeal without further comment. On cross-appeal, Claimant argues that the JCC erred in denying his claim for penalties and in[338]*338terest upon awarding him temporary total disability benefits. Appellants concede that the JCC erred in not doing so. Based on Appellants’ concession, we REVERSE the denial of penalties and interest and REMAND this matter for entry of an order awarding Claimant penalties and interest due to the late payment of temporary total disability benefits.

VAN NORTWICK, ROBERTS, and MARSTILLER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this workers’ compensation matter, Appellants argue that the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) erred on four counts, none of which have merit. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the issues on appeal without further comment. On cross-appeal, Claimant argues that the JCC erred in denying his claim for penalties and in[338]*338terest upon awarding him temporary total disability benefits. Appellants concede that the JCC erred in not doing so. Based on Appellants’ concession, we REVERSE the denial of penalties and interest and REMAND this matter for entry of an order awarding Claimant penalties and interest due to the late payment of temporary total disability benefits.

VAN NORTWICK, ROBERTS, and MARSTILLER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

90 So. 3d 337, 2012 WL 2054235, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 9209, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/diversified-development-of-kansas-city-inc-v-sanchez-fladistctapp-2012.