Gibson v. Holton Construction Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Gibson v. Holton Construction Co.

559 So. 2d 451, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 2500, 1990 WL 43133

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 12, 1990

DocketNo. 89-1974

StatusPublished

This text of 559 So. 2d 451 (Gibson v. Holton Construction Co.) 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

Gibson v. Holton Construction Co., 559 So. 2d 451, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 2500, 1990 WL 43133 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

SHIVERS, Chief Judge.

The claimant in this workers’ compensation case appeals an order in which the judge of compensation claims denied attorney’s fees, as well as past and future attendant care benefits at the rate of 24 hours per day. We affirm the order as to past attendant care benefits, finding there to be competent substantial evidence in the record to support the judge’s conclusion that claimant has not required around-the-clock attendant care since his November 8, 1983 accident, as well as to support his award of three weeks of past attendant care benefits at the rate of eight hours per day.

We also affirm the judge’s denial of future attendant care benefits, but do so without prejudice to claimant’s right to seek such benefits in the future, should it become necessary for him to do so.

Last, we reverse the judge’s denial of attorney’s fees, based on the parties’ stipulation that at least a portion of the benefits awarded claimant were the result of claimant’s attorney having filed a claim. Dalton v. Orange County Sheriff, 503 So.2d 406 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987).

Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse, and remand for further proceedings on the issue of attorney’s fees.

JOANOS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.

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

SHIVERS, Chief Judge.

The claimant in this workers’ compensation case appeals an order in which the judge of compensation claims denied attorney’s fees, as well as past and future attendant care benefits at the rate of 24 hours per day. We affirm the order as to past attendant care benefits, finding there to be competent substantial evidence in the record to support the judge’s conclusion that claimant has not required around-the-clock attendant care since his November 8, 1983 accident, as well as to support his award of three weeks of past attendant care benefits at the rate of eight hours per day.

We also affirm the judge’s denial of future attendant care benefits, but do so without prejudice to claimant’s right to seek such benefits in the future, should it become necessary for him to do so.

Last, we reverse the judge’s denial of attorney’s fees, based on the parties’ stipulation that at least a portion of the benefits awarded claimant were the result of claimant’s attorney having filed a claim. Dalton v. Orange County Sheriff, 503 So.2d 406 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987).

Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse, and remand for further proceedings on the issue of attorney’s fees.

JOANOS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

559 So. 2d 451, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 2500, 1990 WL 43133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gibson-v-holton-construction-co-fladistctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack