Cases

An appellate court may raise subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte even where neither party raises the issue.  Courts are bound to take notice of the limits of their authority and if want of jurisdiction appears at any state of the proceedings, original or appellate, the court should notice the defect and enter an appropriate order.  Courts of compensation claims are not courts of general jurisdiction and therefore do not have general jurisdiction over any subject matter beyond that specifically conferred by statute. Workers' compensation is purely a creature of statute. All rights and liabilities under that system are created by Chapter 440, as is the deputy's power to hear and determine issues in a workers' compensation case.

Dismissal of Petitions for Benefits divests the JCC of jurisdiction. The loss of jurisdiction occurs even when the dismissal of a Petition for Benefits is without prejudice.The effect of a voluntary dismiss is to remove completely from the court's consideration the power to enter an order, equivalent in all respects to a deprivation of jurisdiction. Chapter 440 does recognize limited exceptions in which a JCC has jurisdiction over certain matters in the absence of a Petition for Benefits.  See Vazquez v. Romero, 179 So.3d 402(Fla. 1st DCA 2015). Most of the exceptions generally involve discovery requests or disputes.  See also 440.33(1), Florida Statutes.  See case for additional circumstances where the JCC has jurisdiction to decide issues where there is no pending Petition for Benefits.

In this case, without the existence of a Petition for Benefits, the claimant filed with DOAH a motion requesting the JCC to vacate an arbitration determination that the parties had voluntarily entered into. Section 440.1926 allows for a process for alternate dispute resolutions as opposed to the filing of a Petition for Benefits pursuant to Chapter 440, Florida Statutes.  This provision, however, specifically states that such provision for arbitrations shall be governed by Chapter 682, the Florida Arbitration Code.

The JCC interpreted the jurisdiction to apply to the ability of a JCC to interpret the statute utilizing the in pari materia statutory construction processes to allow for the JCC to have jurisdiction in this matter. On appeal, court determined that utilizing this statutory process for interpretation did not apply in this case since the language of the statute is clear that there is no occasion for resorting to the rules of statutory interpretation and construction. The employer/claimant can mutually agree to seek consent from a JCC to enter into binding arbitration in lieu of any other remedy provided for in Chapter 440 to resolve all issues in dispute regarding an injury. However, the enforcement of an arbitration award is available in the same manner and with the same powers as a final compensation order entered by the JCC.  Section 4440.211 and 440.1926, Florida Statutes, provides separate and distinct provisions setting forth two avenues of dispute resolution. One mandatory per pre-employment or pre-accident contractual agreements of the parties and one optional formed post-employment and post-accident subject to the consent of the JCC. The claimant in this case filed a Motion to Vacate the arbitration award with the JCC.  However, the JCC did not have jurisdiction to modify the arbitration agreement/findings.