Payne v. Griner-Woodruff, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Payne v. Griner-Woodruff, Inc.

462 So. 2d 518, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 102, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 11877

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 3, 1985

DocketNo. AZ-372

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 462 So. 2d 518 (Payne v. Griner-Woodruff, Inc.) 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

Payne v. Griner-Woodruff, Inc., 462 So. 2d 518, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 102, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 11877 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinions

SHIVERS, Judge.

Claimant Roger Payne appeals workers’ compensation order abating claimant’s wage-loss claim and hearing thereon. We reverse and remand.

Claimant Payne was initially awarded wage-loss benefits in an order which was appealed to our court in Case No. AX-148. 457 So.2d 1120. While that appeal was pending, Payne filed claim for wage-loss benefits for a subsequent time period. The deputy commissioner abated the claim for the subsequent period, stating that the nature of the claim, as well as the specific defenses raised by the employer/carrier, are identical to those raised at the prior hearing.

Although we recently ruled in Case No. AX-148 that claimant is entitled to wage-loss benefits on that earlier claim, this does not furnish the rationale for our holding here. Case No. AX-148 and the instant case (No. AZ-372) are for two separate periods of entitlement to wage-loss. Claimant is entitled to proceed under Section 440.25, Florida Statutes, and to have his wage-loss claim for this subsequent period timely heard. The deputy erred in abating the claim and the hearing on this claim.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

[519]*519WENTWORTH, J., concurs. MILLS, J., dissents with opinion.

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