MICHAEL G. QUINTANA, APPELLANT,
v.
SOUTHERN PRECAST, INC. AND FEISCO, APPELLEES

Fla. 1st DCA | 1994-03-09
No. 93-800
BOOTH, MICKLE and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.
634 So. 2d 688 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1994) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

Quintana appealed a workers' compensation settlement approval, arguing that material medical evidence was withheld from the judge and claimant. The court reversed, holding that the employer failed to comply with a procedural rule requiring disclosure of all material evidence before settlement approval.


Holding

The settlement agreement cannot be approved under these circumstances. Rule 4.131(d) of the Florida Rules of Workers Compensation Procedure requires that prior to approval of any settlement agreement, the parties provide the judge with all evidence in their possession which is material to the proposed settlement.


Headnotes

[1] A settlement agreement under section 440.20(12)(b), Florida Statutes, may be set aside if the parties fail to provide the judge of compensation claims with all material e…

[2] Florida Rule of Workers' Compensation Procedure 4.131(d) mandates that parties submit all evidence material to a proposed settlement to the judge of compensation claims b…

Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“rule 4.131(d) of the Florida Rules of Workers Compensation Procedure requires that prior to approval of any settlement agreement, the parties provide the JCC with all evidence in their possession which is material to the proposed settlement”

Establishes the mandatory procedural requirement that was violated

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Quintana entered into a workers' compensation settlement agreement. At the time of settlement, Quintana was unaware of a written medical report by Dr.…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us on appeal from a final order of the judge of compensation claims (JCC), declining to set aside a settlement agreement entered under section 440.-20(12)(b), Florida Statutes. We reverse because rule 4.131(d) of the Florida Rules of Workers Compensation Procedure requires that prior to approval of any settlement agreement, the parties provide the JCC with all evidence in their possession which is material to the proposed settlement. At the time claimant entered into the settlement agreement, claimant was unaware of the existence of a written report by one Dr. Var-roux, which was the sole medical evidence of a causal relationship between claimant’s medical condition and his employment. It is unclear from the record whether the employer and servicing agent (E/SA) had obtained a copy of Dr. Varroux’s opinion prior to the settlement agreement.1 What is clear from the record, however, is that the E/SA did not provide a copy of the report to the JCC and that the JCC and claimant were unaware of its contents at the time of settlement.

The order appealed from is therefore reversed, and this cause is remanded with instructions that the JCC make a determination as to whether the E/SA complied with the requirements of rule 4.131(d).

BOOTH, MICKLE and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur. . The E/SA state in their answer brief, "If the employer/servicing agent did not believe it had any exposure to the payment of benefits, it would have little incentive to settle the matter. Obtaining evidence, such as the medical report from Dr. Varraux [sic], was, at least theoretically, considered in the determination of the settlement amount."


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Sanders v. City OF Orlando, 997 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 2008)
    …, e.g., Steele v. A.D.H. Bldg. Contractors, Inc., 174 So. 2d 16, 19 (Fla.1965) (discussing the power of a JCC, formerly known as a “deputy commissioner,” to set aside settlement agreements for var [*1094] ious reasons); Quintana v. S. Precast, Inc., 634 So. 2d 688, 689 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (substantially the same). In fact, multiple decisions have even concluded that the failure of a JCC to set aside a settlement agreement under certain circumstances constitutes error. See, e.g., Gilliland v. Wood ‘N You, 626…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw