Simpson v. Tarmac America, LLC

124 So. 3d 1039, 2013 WL 5927969, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 17651
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Simpson v. Tarmac America, LLC. Read the opinion of the Court — 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 1757
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 6, 2013·No. No. 3D12-3206·Published

Opinion

SALTER, J.

We affirm the Final Summary Judgment entered against appellant, Kevin Charles Simpson. See Morales v. Weil, 44 So.3d 173, 178 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (“[t]he duty to provide a reasonably safe working place for employees of an independent contractor does not relate to known hazards which are part of or incidental to the very work the contractor was hired to perform.”) (quoting Johnson v. Boca Raton Cmty. Hosp., Inc., 985 So.2d 593, 596 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)).

On cross-appeal, we find that the General Settlement and Waiver between G & R Medical Services, Inc., its insurance carrier, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, and Mr. Simpson, was limited in scope to Mr. Simpson’s benefits under Chapter 440, Florida Statutes, and his claims against G & R and Liberty Mutual, but did not extend to, or include, Mr. Simpson’s claims against Tarmac America, LLC.

Affirmed.

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

Simpson v. Tarmac America, LLC, 124 So. 3d 1039, 2013 WL 5927969, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 17651 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

124 So. 3d 1039 (Simpson v. Tarmac America, LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Morales v. Weil
44 So. 3d 173 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)