Workers' Compensation
Listed below is McConnaughhay, Coonrod, Pope, Weaver & Stern, P.A.'s workers' compensation case law database. The database dates back until 1971 and includes over 5500 workers' compensation court decisions.
To view the case summaries, select one of the general topics listed below.
Mandico v. Taos Construction, Inc.
605 So.2d 850, 17 FLW S445, July 9, 1992
Ordinarily, a contractor is not required to obtain
workers' compensation coverage for an independent
contractor and is therefore not entitled to immunity
pursuant to Section 440.11, Florida Statutes. However,
in this case, the contractor secured workers'
compensation coverage for the independent contractor by
deducting a certain amount from amounts due the
independent contractor for the purpose of obtaining
workers' compensation coverage. In this case, the
contractor required the independent contractor to have
his own workers' compensation insurance or if he did
not, then amounts due the independent contractor would
be deducted from sums otherwise payable to the
independent contractor. Supreme Court determined that
contractor had immunity from civil liability for a suit
brought by the independent contractor. The prohibition
against an employer requiring an employee to pay for
workers' compensation coverage would not preclude the
contractor from deducting amounts due the independent
contractor for the purpose of purchasing workers'
compensation coverage. One who claims and receives
workers' compensation benefits will be found to have
elected such compensation as an exclusive remedy where
there is evidence of a conscious choice of remedies.
Likewise, such an individual is estopped from bringing
civil suit against an employer where the elements
necessary for an estoppel are present. In this case,
the Supreme Court determined that the claimant had
elected workers' compensation as his exclusive remedy
for receiving benefits as a result of his injuries and
a civil cause of action could not be brought against
the employer.
Trial court's orders, denying immunity from civil suit
under the workers' compensation statute, may not be
reviewed by a writ of prohibition. A writ of
prohibition is very narrow in scope and operation and
must be employed with caution and utilized only in
emergency cases to prevent an impending injury where
there is no other appropriate and adequate legal
remedy. The defense of exclusive remedy is an
affirmative defense and a writ of prohibition may not
be employed to raise this defense. Florida Rules of
Appellate Procedures were amended by the court to allow
for a reveiw of non-final orders where there is a
determination that a party is not entitled to workers'
compensation immunity.
