Taylor v. General Masonry, Inc.

637 So. 2d 361, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 5093, 1994 WL 231645
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 1, 1994·No. No. 92-2561·Published

Opinion

ERVIN, Judge.

We reverse and remand the case with directions to award claimant indemnity benefits based on an average weekly wage (AWW) of $480, and its corresponding compensation rate (CR). This issue was mature and ripe for adjudication at the time the earlier September 5, 1990 compensation order was entered; therefore, the issue could not be relitigated at the subsequent hearing, which resulted in the order of June 16, 1992, awarding benefits based on a lesser AWW and CR than that on which such benefits had earlier been awarded. See City of Hialeah v. Cascardo, 443 So.2d 448 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Florida Power & Light Co. v. Haycraft, 421 So.2d 674 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Hunt v. International Mineral & Chem. Corp., 410 So.2d 640 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).

REVERSED and REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this decision.

JOANOS and KAHN, JJ., concur.

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

Taylor v. General Masonry, Inc., 637 So. 2d 361, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 5093, 1994 WL 231645 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

637 So. 2d 361 (Taylor v. General Masonry, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hunt v. INTERN. MINERALS AND CHEMICAL CORP.
410 So. 2d 640 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)
Florida Power & Light Co. v. Haycraft
421 So. 2d 674 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)
City of Hialeah v. Cascardo
443 So. 2d 448 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)