WAUSAU BUSINESS INSURANCE COMPANY AND WAUSAU UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
LESBIA QUINTANA, APPELLEE
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.
This case involves an appeal by insurance companies challenging a lower court's denial of their motion to dismiss based on workers' compensation immunity. The appellate court determined the order was not directly appealable and treated the appeal as a petition for a writ of certiorari, which was ultimately denied.
No, a non-final order denying a motion to dismiss on the grounds of workers' compensation immunity is not directly appealable unless the trial court's order explicitly states that the defendant will not be entitled to present this defense at trial.
[1] A non-final order denying a motion to dismiss on the issue of workers' compensation immunity is generally not appealable under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a…
[2] A non-final order denying summary judgment on a claim of workers' compensation immunity is not appealable unless the trial court's order explicitly states that the defend…
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“The lower courts of Florida have strictly adhered to this Court’s decisions in Hastings and Culver, determining that a district court does not have jurisdiction to review a nonfinal order denying summary final judgment unless the trial court’s order explicitly states that the defendant will not be entitled to present a workers’ compensation immunity defense at trial”
Explains the jurisdictional limitation on appealing non-final orders denying workers' compensation immunity defenses.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWausau Business Insurance Company and Wausau Underwriters Insurance Company (defendants below) appealed a non-final order that denied their motion to …
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Appealability Of Non-Final Orders cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal by Wausau Business Insurance Company and Wausau Underwriters Insurance Company, defendants below, for review of a non-final order denying their motion to dismiss on the issue of workers’ compensation immunity. The instant order is not appealable under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(v).
See Reeves v. Fleetwood Homes of Florida, Inc., 889 So. 2d 812, 821 (Fla.2004)(finding that “[t]he lower courts of Florida have strictly adhered to this Court’s decisions in Hastings and Culver, determining that a district court does not have jurisdiction to review a nonfinal order denying summary final judgment unless the trial court’s order explicitly states that the defendant will not be entitled to present a workers’ compensation immunity defense at trial”); Florida Dep’t of Corrs. v. Culver, 716 So. 2d 768 (Fla.1998); Hastings v. Demming, 694 So. 2d 718, 720 (Fla.1997)(finding that “[njonfinal orders denying summary judgment on a claim of workers’ compensation immunity are not appealable unless the trial order specifically states that, as a matter of law, such a defense is not available to a party”); 94th Aero Squadron of Miami, Inc. v. Colon, 862 So. 2d 806 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)(treating an appeal from an adverse summary judgment as a petition for a writ of certiorari because a nonfinal order determining whether a party is entitled to workers’ compensation immunity is not appealable unless the trial court order specifically states that, as a matter of law, such defense is not available to a party).
We therefore treat this as a petition for a writ of certiorari and deny the petition. See Martin-Johnson, Inc. v. Savage, 509 So. 2d 1097, 1099 (Fla.1987)(holding that, for a nonfinal order to be reviewable by petition for certiorari, the order must depart from the essential requirements of law, thus causing material injury to the petitioner throughout the remainder of the proceedings below and effectively leaving no adequate remedy on appeal).
Petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Martin-Johnson, Inc. v. Savage, 509 So. 2d 1097 (Fla. 1987)
- Reeves v. Fleetwood Homes OF Fla., Inc., 889 So. 2d 812 (Fla. 2004)
- Hastings v. Demming, 694 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 1997)
- Fla. Dep't OF Corr. v. Culver, 716 So. 2d 768 (Fla. 1998)
- Greenberg v. Greenberg, 862 So. 2d 806 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
- 94th Aero Squadron OF Miami, Inc. v. Colon, 862 So. 2d 806 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)