CHESTER O. BOYD, PETITIONER,
v.
HUDSON PULP AND PAPER CORPORATION AND THE FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION, RESPONDENTS
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.
The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a certiorari petition concerning a worker's compensation claim. The court found the full commission's reversal of the deputy commissioner's award to be correct in its outcome but flawed in its reasoning, necessitating a remand for further factual findings.
The court held that the order of the deputy commissioner was deficient in specific findings of fact and therefore defective. However, the court also held that the cause should be remanded to the deputy commissioner for reconsideration and further findings of fact.
“we agree that the order of the deputy was deficient in specific findings of fact and therefore defective and should be reversed”
Establishes the court's agreement with the commission's finding that the deputy's order was legally insufficient.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe claimant petitioned for certiorari after the full commission reversed a deputy commissioner's award of compensation and dismissed the claim. The S…
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 Remand For Reconsideration cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause came before the court upon petition for certiorari filed by the claimant when the full commission reversed the order of the deputy commissioner awarding him compensation and dismissed the claim. After oral argument and careful study of the record we agree that the order of the deputy was deficient in specific findings of fact and therefore defective and should be reversed, but we think that the cause should be remanded to the deputy commissioner for reconsideration and further findings of fact in accordance with the requirements as delineated in Hardy v. City of Tarpon Springs, 81 So.2d 503 (Fla.1955) and Wiedman v. Daryl Products Corporation, 127 So.2d 448 (Fla.1961).
Accordingly, we quash the order of the commission with directions that the cause be remanded to the deputy commissioner for reconsideration and further findings of fact.
It is so ordered.
THOMAS, ROBERTS, THORNAL and CALDWELL, JJ., concur.
DREW, C. J., dissents with opinion.
O’CONNELL and ERVIN, JJ., dissent and concur with DREW, C. J.
(dissenting).
In this workmen’s compensation case, the deputy commissioner, after extended hearings, awarded benefits to claimant but, on review, the full commission reversed such award holding:
“ * * * tjje deputy has failed to make a definite finding that claimant had sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment which either caused a hernia or aggravated a pre-existing hernia. However, even if the deputy had made such a finding, it would appear that there is no competent, substantial evidence which accords with logic and reason to sustain same.”
The majority remand the cause to the deputy to make adequate findings. I think that under the language of the full commission’s order such remand would serve no useful purpose inasmuch as the commission in the last paragraph above quoted has concluded that there is no record evidence sufficient to support the award in any event.
While in some respects the award of the deputy is ambiguous and inartfully drawn, in my view the findings of fact made therein are sufficient to meet the requirements announced by this Court in previous decisions. Moreover, I think there is competent, substantial evidence in the record adequate to support the award of the deputy commissioner. Under such circumstances, it is our duty to reinstate such award and to quash the full commission’s order. The citation of authority to support this conclusion would be redundant.
I would quash the order of the full commission with directions to reinstate the order of the deputy commissioner.
O’CONNELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.
DREW, Chief Justice
(dissenting).
In this workmen’s compensation case, the deputy commissioner, after extended hearings, awarded benefits to claimant but, on review, the full commission reversed such award holding:
“ * * * tjje deputy has failed to make a definite finding that claimant had sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment which either caused a hernia or aggravated a pre-existing hernia. However, even if the deputy had made such a finding, it would appear that there is no competent, substantial evidence which accords with logic and reason to sustain same.”
The majority remand the cause to the deputy to make adequate findings. I think that under the language of the full commission’s order such remand would serve no useful purpose inasmuch as the commission in the last paragraph above quoted has concluded that there is no record evidence sufficient to support the award in any event.
While in some respects the award of the deputy is ambiguous and inartfully drawn, in my view the findings of fact made therein are sufficient to meet the requirements announced by this Court in previous decisions. Moreover, I think there is competent, substantial evidence in the record adequate to support the award of the deputy commissioner. Under such circumstances, it is our duty to reinstate such award and to quash the full commission’s order. The citation of authority to support this conclusion would be redundant.
I would quash the order of the full commission with directions to reinstate the order of the deputy commissioner. O’CONNELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. & Tamiami Trail Tours, Inc. v. Durrance, 174 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 1965)…1 So. 2d 503; Bachelder v. Four Way Nursery, Fla.1962, 136 So. 2d 643; Patrylo v. Nautilus Hotel, Fla.1962, 142 So. 2d 279; McGinley v. Industrial Equipment and Supplies, Fla.1963, 148 So. 2d 273; Boyd v. Hudson Pulp and Paper Corporation, Fla.1964, 162 So. 2d 519. The inadequacy of the compensation order was raised on the application for review before the full commission but not discussed in their short order affirming the deputy. It is again raised in this Court. Because of this glaring deficiency in the or…
-
Boyd v. Hudson Pulp & Paper Corp. & the Fla. Indus. Comm'n, 177 So. 2d 331 (Fla. 1965)…findings of fact and therefore should have been reversed, but remanded to the deputy commissioner for reconsideration and findings consistent with facts and prior holdings. Accordingly, the order of the commission was quashed with directions, Fla., 162 So. 2d 519. The case recurs by petition for certiorari from the second order in the cause filed by the full commission which again reversed the compensation award made by the deputy commissioner and dismissed the claim. A further study of the record presentl…
Authorities Cited
- Hampton Hardy v. City OF Tarpon Springs, 81 So. 2d 503 (Fla. 1955)
- Wiedman v. Daryl Prods. Corp., 127 So. 2d 448 (Fla. 1961)