Mitchell v. Metro Dade

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Mitchell v. Metro Dade

797 So. 2d 10, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 8426, 2001 WL 672051

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 18, 2001

DocketNo. 1D00-2341

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 797 So. 2d 10 (Mitchell v. Metro Dade) 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

Mitchell v. Metro Dade, 797 So. 2d 10, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 8426, 2001 WL 672051 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

When this case was last before us, we remanded for reconsideration in light of Closet Maid v. Sykes, 763 So.2d 377 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (en banc). See Miami-Dade County v. Mitchell, 754 So.2d 773, 774 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). On remand, a successor judge of compensation claims reviewed the written record and entered the order now under review. Claimant contends that she should have been allowed to testify in person before the judge of compensation claims since the order denying her claim reflects that the judge of compensation claims did not credit her hearing testimony. See Greenwell v. Bellsouth Telecomms., 732 So.2d 333, 333 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Palmieri v. NAACO, 677 So.2d 1310, 1311 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Harrington v. Vida Appliance Corp., 542 So.2d 1006, 1007 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Maddox v. Rinaldi’s Expressway Lanes, 459 So.2d 421, 422 & n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Rappoport v. American Hosp., 406 So.2d 1244, 1245 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). See also Frazier v. Bay County, 781 So.2d 464, 464 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Hatcher v. St. Joe Paper Co., 608 So.2d 65, 66 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Carr v. Byers, 578 So.2d 347, 347-48 & nn. 1-2 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Reaves v. Reaves, 546 So.2d 744, 745 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Anders v. Anders, 376 So.2d 439, 440 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). Particularly since the record contained only a summary of the testimony adduced at the original hearing, we are constrained to reverse. On remand, the judge of compensation claims shall afford claimant an opportunity to testify in person.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

BENTON, VAN NORTWICK, and LEWIS, JJ., CONCUR.

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

PER CURIAM

When this case was last before us, we remanded for reconsideration in light of Closet Maid v. Sykes, 763 So.2d 377 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (en banc). See Miami-Dade County v. Mitchell, 754 So.2d 773, 774 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). On remand, a successor judge of compensation claims reviewed the written record and entered the order now under review. Claimant contends that she should have been allowed to testify in person before the judge of compensation claims since the order denying her claim reflects that the judge of compensation claims did not credit her hearing testimony. See Greenwell v. Bellsouth Telecomms., 732 So.2d 333, 333 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Palmieri v. NAACO, 677 So.2d 1310, 1311 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Harrington v. Vida Appliance Corp., 542 So.2d 1006, 1007 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Maddox v. Rinaldi’s Expressway Lanes, 459 So.2d 421, 422 & n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Rappoport v. American Hosp., 406 So.2d 1244, 1245 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). See also Frazier v. Bay County, 781 So.2d 464, 464 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Hatcher v. St. Joe Paper Co., 608 So.2d 65, 66 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Carr v. Byers, 578 So.2d 347, 347-48 & nn. 1-2 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Reaves v. Reaves, 546 So.2d 744, 745 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Anders v. Anders, 376 So.2d 439, 440 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). Particularly since the record contained only a summary of the testimony adduced at the original hearing, we are constrained to reverse. On remand, the judge of compensation claims shall afford claimant an opportunity to testify in person.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

BENTON, VAN NORTWICK, and LEWIS, JJ., CONCUR.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

797 So. 2d 10, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 8426, 2001 WL 672051, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mitchell-v-metro-dade-fladistctapp-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack