Abbey Adams Logo

Defending Liability, Workers' Compensation, Employment Claims and Appeals Since 1982

  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

  • Bloglovin
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Phone
  • Home
  • Locations
    • Where We Practice in Florida
    • Where We Practice In Illinois
  • Practices
  • Attorneys
    • David J. Abbey
    • Jeffrey M. Adams
    • Bruce D. Burk
    • Robert P. Byelick
    • Jaime Eagan
    • Jennifer J. Kennedy
    • John D. Kiernan (1947-2016)
    • V. Joseph Mueller
    • Steven A. Ochsner
    • Alexis C. Upton
  • Blog
  • Links
  • Contact Us

January 20, 2017 by admin

Workers’ compensation — Forfeiture of benefits — False, fraudulent, or misleading statement for purpose of securing workers’ compensation benefits

42
Fla. L. Weekly D205b
Top of Form

Workers’
compensation — Forfeiture of benefits — False, fraudulent, or misleading
statement for purpose of securing workers’ compensation benefits — Judge of
compensation claims erred in rejecting employer/carrier’s affirmative defense
of misrepresentation based on application of civil case law on fraud — Proper
two-part analysis requires JCC to determine whether claimant made false,
fraudulent, or misleading statement and, if so, whether at time statement was
made, it was made with intent to obtain benefits — Remand with instructions to
revisit evidence and make findings under proper standard

CITY
OF HIALEAH/SEDGWICK CMS, Appellants, v. TONY BONO, Appellee. 1st District. Case
No. 1D16-957. Opinion filed January 19, 2017. An appeal from an order of the
Judge of Compensation Claims. Gerardo Castiello, Judge. Date of Accident:
December 2, 2013. Counsel: David Goehl of Martinez Roman Goehl, P.A., Miami
Lakes, for Appellants. Kimberly A. Hill of Kimberly A. Hill, P.L., Fort
Lauderdale, for Appellee.

(PER
CURIAM.) In this workers’ compensation case, the Employer/Carrier (E/C) appeal
an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) rejecting their affirmative
defense of misrepresentation under sections 440.09(4) and 440.105(4), Florida
Statutes, and awarding benefits to Claimant. Because the JCC applied the wrong
legal analysis, we reverse the order, and remand for findings under the proper
standard.

It
is illegal for any person to “knowingly make, or cause to be made, any false,
fraudulent, or misleading oral or written statement for the purpose of
obtaining or denying any benefit or payment” under the Workers’ Compensation
Law. § 440.105(4)(b)1., Fla. Stat. (2013). And workers’ compensation benefits
are barred for an employee found to have “knowingly or intentionally engaged
in” such acts “for the purpose of securing workers’ compensation benefits.” §
440.09(4), Fla. Stat. (2013). Determining that there has been a violation of
section 440.105(4) requires a two-part inquiry, encompassing first a finding as
to whether a false (or fraudulent or misleading) statement was made by the
claimant, and second a finding as to whether, at the time the statement was
made, it was made with the intent to obtain benefits. See Arreola v.
Admin. Concepts
, 17 So. 3d 792, 794 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (“In deciding this
issue, the JCC had to answer two questions. The first is whether Claimant made
or caused to be made false, fraudulent or misleading statements. The second is
whether the statement was intended by Claimant to be for the purpose of
obtaining benefits.”); see also Village Apartments v. Hernandez,
856 So. 2d 1140, 1142 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (“Regardless of whether the claimant
was under oath, if, at the time he made any of these statements, he knew they
were false . . . then the statements fall within the scope of section
440.105(4)(b)2.”).

Instead
of engaging in this two-part analysis, the JCC applied civil case law on fraud,
and the JCC made no mention of whether Claimant actually made specific false or
misleading statements, instead characterizing the “inconsistencies” in
Claimant’s testimony as “impeachment.” Thus, remand is needed for the JCC to
apply the proper standard of law. On remand, the JCC is charged to revisit the
evidence and make findings under the proper standard.

REVERSED
and REMANDED for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion. (ROBERTS,
C.J., ROWE, and WINOKUR, JJ., CONCUR.)

* *
*

Filed Under: Articles

Primary Sidebar

Blog Archives

  • January 2021
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013

Footer

The materials available at this website are for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this Website or any of the e-mail links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Abbey, Adams, Byelick & Mueller, L.L.P. and the user or browser. The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney. opens in a new windowAbbey, Adams, Byelick, & Mueller XML Sitemap Index

Copyright © 2021 · Abbey Adams Byelick & Mueller, LLP · All Rights Reserved · Defending Liability, Workers' Compensation, Employment Claims and Appeals Since 1982