SCHOOL BD. OF COLLIER CTY. v. Salter

457 So. 2d 1132, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2196, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15484
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedOctober 16, 1984
DocketAX-414
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 457 So. 2d 1132 (SCHOOL BD. OF COLLIER CTY. v. Salter) 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
SCHOOL BD. OF COLLIER CTY. v. Salter, 457 So. 2d 1132, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2196, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15484 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Opinion

457 So.2d 1132 (1984)

The SCHOOL BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY, Florida, Appellant,
v.
Nancy SALTER, Appellee.

No. AX-414.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

October 16, 1984.

James H. Siesky, P.A., Naples, for appellant.

Richard I. Cervelli, P.A., Naples, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The deputy's order awarding claimant's attorney a fee of $8,500.00 is reversed for failure to make a finding of the benefits obtained for claimant by the attorney and for failure to adequately explain how the factors in Lee Engineering and Construction Co. v. Fellows, 209 So.2d 454 (Fla. 1968), were applied to arrive at the fee awarded. Commercial Carrier Corp. v. Porter, 452 So.2d 125 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); and Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services/Division of Blind Services v. Bean, 435 So.2d 967 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). We hasten to add that this reversal should not be interpreted as an indication that we view the award of $8,500.00 as excessive and/or an abuse of discretion. The order simply does not contain the necessary findings to permit an orderly review by this court, in the face of the specific questions raised by the E/C concerning the extent to which the amount of the award was affected by the method of calculating benefits obtained for the claimant. Upon remand, the deputy is directed to consider Deese v. Oolite Rock Company, IRC Order 2-1045 (1961), affirmed, 134 So.2d 241 (Fla. 1961), which requires the present value of claimant's compensation payments to be determined and used for purposes of calculating the statutory schedule amount of attorney's fees due under Section 440.34(1), Florida Statutes (1977). Deese provides that the four percent (4%) statutory discount *1133 factor may be utilized to compute the present value of claimant's compensation payments. Since the date of accident in this case is May 24, 1978, the newly enacted eight percent (8%) statutory discount factor, which has been held by this court to be prospective only, would not apply. Cone Brothers Contracting v. Gordon, 453 So.2d 420 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).

Accordingly, the deputy's order is REVERSED and the cause REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

BOOTH, SMITH and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Sistrunk v. City of Dunedin
715 So. 2d 375 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Rolle v. Metropolitan Dade County
642 So. 2d 100 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
Taylor v. Fulmer-Orlando
528 So. 2d 1224 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Baron Transport v. Riley
526 So. 2d 1028 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Locke v. Rooney
508 So. 2d 467 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Cason v. Alachua Builders
466 So. 2d 1269 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Department of Health & Rehabilitation, Division of Risk Management v. Lucas
466 So. 2d 1269 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
457 So. 2d 1132, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2196, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15484, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/school-bd-of-collier-cty-v-salter-fladistctapp-1984.