Donadio Construction Co. v. Fowler

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Donadio Construction Co. v. Fowler

585 So. 2d 1200, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 10222, 1991 WL 192040

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 26, 1991

DocketNo. 90-3262

StatusPublished

This text of 585 So. 2d 1200 (Donadio Construction Co. v. Fowler) 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

Donadio Construction Co. v. Fowler, 585 So. 2d 1200, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 10222, 1991 WL 192040 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this worker’s compensation case, appellants raise the following three questions for review: Whether the JCC’s award of permanent total disability (PTD) supplemental benefits is supported by competent substantial evidence; whether payment of PTD supplemental benefits was timely commenced; and, whether the JCC properly awarded attorney’s fees costs, penalties and interest?

With respect to the first two issues, we affirm. With respect to the third issue, however, because we find that the JCC’s order does not clearly reflect the statutory basis for the award of fees, costs, penalties and interest, we remand for clarification of the award.

Affirmed in part; reversed and remanded in part.

BOOTH, BARFIELD and MINER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this worker’s compensation case, appellants raise the following three questions for review: Whether the JCC’s award of permanent total disability (PTD) supplemental benefits is supported by competent substantial evidence; whether payment of PTD supplemental benefits was timely commenced; and, whether the JCC properly awarded attorney’s fees costs, penalties and interest?

With respect to the first two issues, we affirm. With respect to the third issue, however, because we find that the JCC’s order does not clearly reflect the statutory basis for the award of fees, costs, penalties and interest, we remand for clarification of the award.

Affirmed in part; reversed and remanded in part.

BOOTH, BARFIELD and MINER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

585 So. 2d 1200, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 10222, 1991 WL 192040, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donadio-construction-co-v-fowler-fladistctapp-1991.