Silvestre Andres Dominguez v. South East Personnel Leasing, Inc./Packard Claims Administration, Centerline Directional Drilling Service, Inc./Lion Insurance
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledMarch 12, 2020
Docket1D19-1385
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
No. 1D19-1385
_____________________________
SILVESTRE ANDRES DOMINGUEZ,
Appellant,
v.
SOUTH EAST PERSONNEL
LEASING, INC./PACKARD CLAIMS
ADMINISTRATION, CENTERLINE
DIRECTIONAL DRILLING SERVICE,
INC./LION INSURANCE,
Appellees.
_____________________________
On appeal from an order of Judge of Compensation Claims.
Margaret E. Sojourner, Judge.
Date of Accident: April 19, 2017.
March 12, 2020
PER CURIAM.
In this workers’ compensation case, Claimant challenges an
order of the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) dismissing
Claimant’s claim for permanent total disability (PTD) benefits. For
the reasons below, we reverse.
Claimant was injured in April 2017. On September 7, 2018,
he filed the first of two petitions for benefits (PFB) seeking PTD
benefits. The Employer/Carrier (E/C) filed their first response to
the PFB on October 4, 2018; therein, they stated, “The
employer/carrier voluntarily accepts the injured worker as
permanently totally disabled starting of August 21, 2018,” and
agreed to pay “reasonable taxable cost associated with the filing of
the petition.” The JCC concluded that she lacked jurisdiction.
But the JCC had jurisdiction over the case when the first PFB
was filed, because the E/C did not administratively accept
Claimant as PTD until October 4, 2018. The E/C’s voluntary
acceptance did not remove the matter from the JCC’s jurisdiction
because the JCC retained jurisdiction over costs, and because it
was never clear that Claimant received any benefits between the
date the E/C concedes Claimant was entitled to PTD benefits
(August 21, 2018) and the date Claimant lodged his claim for PTD
benefits (September 7, 2018).
Claimant’s counsel averred that the E/C had not paid those
benefits and argued that Claimant was entitled to an evidentiary
hearing on the matter. We agree and therefore REVERSE and
REMAND for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.
WOLF and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., and DUNCAN, J. SCOTT, ASSOCIATE
JUDGE, concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and
authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
9.331.
_____________________________
Cory J. Pollack, Fort Myers; and Bill McCabe of William J.
McCabe, P.A., Longwood, for Appellant.
Robert B. Bennett and Karen E. Ferguson of Bennett, Jacobs &
Adams, P.A., Tampa, for Appellees.
2