General Development Corp. v. Price

District Court of Appeal of Florida

General Development Corp. v. Price

404 So. 2d 859, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21276

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 16, 1981·No. No. ZZ-229·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The deputy commissioner’s determination that the employer/carrier improperly offset workers’ compensation payments to reflect Social Security benefits to claimant’s dependent is reversed in light of our decision in Modern Plating Co. v. Whitton, 394 So.2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). However, we remand for possible redetermination of payments due in light of possible adjustment to claimant’s average weekly wage for profit-sharing benefits. In all other respects, the deputy’s orders are supported by substantial competent evidence.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C. J., and McCORD and MILLS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The deputy commissioner’s determination that the employer/carrier improperly offset workers’ compensation payments to reflect Social Security benefits to claimant’s dependent is reversed in light of our decision in Modern Plating Co. v. Whitton, 394 So.2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). However, we remand for possible redetermination of payments due in light of possible adjustment to claimant’s average weekly wage for profit-sharing benefits. In all other respects, the deputy’s orders are supported by substantial competent evidence.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C. J., and McCORD and MILLS, JJ., concur.

General Development Corp. v. Price, 404 So. 2d 859, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21276 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

404 So. 2d 859 (General Development Corp. v. Price) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related