Florida Statute 440.192 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XXXI
LABOR

Chapter 440
WORKERS' COMPENSATION

View Entire Chapter

440.192 Procedure for resolving benefit disputes.—

(1) Any employee may, for any benefit that is ripe, due, and owing, file with the Office of the Judges of Compensation Claims a petition for benefits which meets the requirements of this section and the definition of specificity in s. 440.02. An employee represented by an attorney shall file by electronic means approved by the Deputy Chief Judge. An employee not represented by an attorney may file by certified mail or by electronic means approved by the Deputy Chief Judge. The department shall inform employees of the location of the Office of the Judges of Compensation Claims and the office’s website address for purposes of filing a petition for benefits. The employee shall also serve copies of the petition for benefits by certified mail, or by electronic means approved by the Deputy Chief Judge, upon the employer and the employer’s carrier. The Deputy Chief Judge shall refer the petitions to the judges of compensation claims.

(2) Upon receipt, the Office of the Judges of Compensation Claims shall review each petition and shall dismiss each petition or any portion of such a petition that does not on its face specifically identify or itemize the following:

(a) Name, address, telephone number, and social security number of the employee.

(b) Name, address, and telephone number of the employer.

(c) A detailed description of the injury and cause of the injury, including the location of the occurrence and the date or dates of the accident.

(d) A detailed description of the employee’s job, work responsibilities, and work the employee was performing when the injury occurred.

(e) The time period for which compensation and the specific classification of compensation were not timely provided.

(f) Date of maximum medical improvement, character of disability, and specific statement of all benefits or compensation that the employee is seeking.

(g) All specific travel costs to which the employee believes she or he is entitled, including dates of travel and purpose of travel, means of transportation, and mileage and including the date the request for mileage was filed with the carrier and a copy of the request filed with the carrier.

(h) Specific listing of all medical charges alleged unpaid, including the name and address of the medical provider, the amounts due, and the specific dates of treatment.

(i) The type or nature of treatment care or attendance sought and the justification for such treatment. If the employee is under the care of a physician for an injury identified under paragraph (c), a copy of the physician’s request, authorization, or recommendation for treatment, care, or attendance must accompany the petition.

(j) Specific explanation of any other disputed issue that a judge of compensation claims will be called to rule upon.

The dismissal of any petition or portion of such a petition under this section is without prejudice and does not require a hearing.

(3) A petition for benefits may contain a claim for past benefits and continuing benefits in any benefit category, but is limited to those in default and ripe, due, and owing on the date the petition is filed. If the employer has elected to satisfy its obligation to provide medical treatment, care, and attendance through a managed care arrangement designated under this chapter, the employee must exhaust all managed care grievance procedures before filing a petition for benefits under this section.

(4) The petition must include a certification by the claimant or, if the claimant is represented by counsel, the claimant’s attorney, stating that the claimant, or attorney if the claimant is represented by counsel, has made a good faith effort to resolve the dispute and that the claimant or attorney was unable to resolve the dispute with the carrier.

(5) All motions to dismiss must state with particularity the basis for the motion. The judge of compensation claims shall enter an order upon such motions without hearing, unless good cause for hearing is shown. When any petition or portion of a petition is dismissed for lack of specificity under this subsection, the claimant must be allowed 20 days after the date of the order of dismissal in which to file an amended petition. Any grounds for dismissal for lack of specificity under this section which are not asserted within 30 days after receipt of the petition for benefits are thereby waived.

(6) If the claimant is not represented by counsel, the Office of the Judges of Compensation Claims may request the Employee Assistance and Ombudsman Office to assist the claimant in filing a petition that meets the requirements of this section.

(7) Notwithstanding the provisions of s. 440.34, a judge of compensation claims may not award attorney’s fees payable by the carrier for services expended or costs incurred prior to the filing of a petition that does not meet the requirements of this section.

(8) Within 14 days after receipt of a petition for benefits by certified mail or by approved electronic means, the carrier must either pay the requested benefits without prejudice to its right to deny within 120 days from receipt of the petition or file a response to petition with the Office of the Judges of Compensation Claims. The response shall be filed by electronic means approved by the Deputy Chief Judge. The carrier must list all benefits requested but not paid and explain its justification for nonpayment in the response to petition. A carrier that does not deny compensability in accordance with s. 440.20(4) is deemed to have accepted the employee’s injuries as compensable, unless it can establish material facts relevant to the issue of compensability that could not have been discovered through reasonable investigation within the 120-day period. The carrier shall provide copies of the response to the filing party, employer, and claimant by certified mail or by electronic means approved by the Deputy Chief Judge.

(9) A petition for benefits must contain claims for all benefits that are ripe, due, and owing on the date the petition is filed. Unless stipulated in writing by the parties, only claims which have been properly raised in a petition for benefits and have undergone mediation may be considered for adjudication by a judge of compensation claims.

History.—s. 25, ch. 93-415; s. 115, ch. 97-103; s. 16, ch. 2001-91; s. 31, ch. 2002-194; s. 22, ch. 2003-412; s. 3, ch. 2011-208.

F.S. 440.192 on Google Scholar

F.S. 440.192 on CourtListener

Amendments to 440.192

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 440.192

Total Results: 87

McBride v. Pratt & Whitney

909 So. 2d 386, 2005 WL 1832429

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 4, 2005 | Docket: 1663223

Cited 14 times | Published

argues, met the specificity requirements of section 440.192). Therefore, according to claimant, the petition

Bynum Transport, Inc. v. Snyder

765 So. 2d 752, 2000 WL 712808

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 5, 2000 | Docket: 1522940

Cited 13 times | Published

a denial of every allegation therein under section 440.192(8)).

Russell Corp. v. Brooks

698 So. 2d 1334, 1997 WL 564204

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 12, 1997 | Docket: 1524276

Cited 13 times | Published

for benefits sent by certified mail violated section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes (Supp.1994), inasmuch

Aguilera v. Inservices, Inc.

905 So. 2d 84, 2005 WL 1403993

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 16, 2005 | Docket: 2104286

Cited 12 times | Published

after a petition for benefits is filed under section 440.192. As well reasoned by Judge Shevin below, there

Morris v. Dollar Tree Store

869 So. 2d 704, 2004 WL 726815

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 6, 2004 | Docket: 1653910

Cited 10 times | Published

time, concluding that the plain language of section 440.192(7), Florida Statutes (2001), precluded the

Checkers Restaurant v. Wiethoff

925 So. 2d 348, 2006 WL 344747

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 16, 2006 | Docket: 1516947

Cited 9 times | Published

earlier en banc opinion in Wuelling explained, section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes, must be read in conjunction

Inservices, Inc. v. Aguilera

837 So. 2d 464, 2002 WL 31870185

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 26, 2002 | Docket: 1527540

Cited 9 times | Published

in a claim for medical benefits. Further, section 440.192, Florida Statutes (2000), provides a procedure

Franklin v. Northwest Airlines

778 So. 2d 418, 2001 WL 85182

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 2, 2001 | Docket: 1290366

Cited 9 times | Published

party, employer, and claimant by certified mail. § 440.192(8), Fla. Stat. (1995). Notices of denial were

North River Ins. Co. v. Wuelling

683 So. 2d 1090, 1996 WL 668438

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 19, 1996 | Docket: 466153

Cited 9 times | Published

statute of limitations, based on application of section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes (Supp.1994). We reverse

Wheeled Coach Industries, Inc. v. Annulis

852 So. 2d 430, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 12560, 2003 WL 21990527

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 22, 2003 | Docket: 1305790

Cited 8 times | Published

constitute a petition for benefits, as defined in section 440.192, Florida Statutes. Moreover, the order granting

Avalon Center v. Hardaway

967 So. 2d 268, 2007 WL 2733823

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 21, 2007 | Docket: 1733684

Cited 7 times | Published

compensation case."). In this case, the JCC relied on section 440.192(2)(h), Florida Statutes, as support for its

McDONALD'S RESTAURANT v. Montes

736 So. 2d 768, 1999 WL 454456

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 7, 1999 | Docket: 1736633

Cited 6 times | Published

benefits were due. This was error. *769 Under section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes (1995), a carrier that

Soriano v. Gold Coast Aerial Lift, Inc.

705 So. 2d 636, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 886, 1998 WL 17045

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 21, 1998 | Docket: 1753698

Cited 6 times | Published

authorization for such was not ripe under section 440.192(3), Florida Statutes (1995), which provides:

Soriano v. Gold Coast Aerial Lift, Inc.

705 So. 2d 636, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 886, 1998 WL 17045

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 21, 1998 | Docket: 1753698

Cited 6 times | Published

authorization for such was not ripe under section 440.192(3), Florida Statutes (1995), which provides:

Farnam v. U.S. Sugar Corp.

9 So. 3d 41, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1922, 2009 WL 559915

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 6, 2009 | Docket: 1667313

Cited 4 times | Published

we reverse and remand as to these issues. Section 440.192(9), Florida Statutes, allows only claims that

Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc. v. Montiel

985 So. 2d 19, 2008 WL 2038790

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 14, 2008 | Docket: 1673541

Cited 4 times | Published

under the workers' compensation statute. See § 440.192. Instead, he sued Coca-Cola and Kash N' Karry

Bussey v. Wal-Mart Store 725

867 So. 2d 542, 2004 WL 358477

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 27, 2004 | Docket: 1722528

Cited 4 times | Published

employer/carrier (E/C) to respond within 134 days to a section 440.192(8) petition for workers' compensation benefits

Eastern Industries, Inc. v. Burnham

750 So. 2d 748, 2000 WL 126351

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 4, 2000 | Docket: 1736526

Cited 4 times | Published

of the petition for benefits, pursuant to section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1994). Section

Waffle House v. Hutchinson

673 So. 2d 883, 1996 WL 199691

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 26, 1996 | Docket: 1671544

Cited 4 times | Published

of directly construing the inartfully drawn section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes (Supp.1994), the court

Diestel v. Winfrey Plumbing, Inc.

668 So. 2d 283, 1996 WL 69104

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 20, 1996 | Docket: 1686919

Cited 4 times | Published

managed care grievance procedure as required by section 440.192(3), Florida Statutes (Supp.1994). Diestel supports

Loziane O. Moise v. Disney Pop Century Resort, and Walt Disney World etc.

244 So. 3d 403

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 30, 2018 | Docket: 6379292

Cited 3 times | Published

which meets the specificity requirements of section 440.192, Florida Statutes, is the determining factor

Audio Visual Innovations, Inc. v. Spiessbach

119 So. 3d 522, 36 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 814, 2013 WL 4253239, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 12860

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 16, 2013 | Docket: 60233635

Cited 3 times | Published

“[pjrocedure for resolving benefit disputes.” See § 440.192. An employee seeking “any benefit that is ripe

Black v. Tomoka State Park

106 So. 3d 973, 2013 WL 427146, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 1684

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 5, 2013 | Docket: 60228514

Cited 3 times | Published

claimants had filed a prior PFB, compliant with section 440.192, Florida Statutes, asserting both a claim for

Integrated Health Services v. Hyde

721 So. 2d 1217, 1998 WL 874836

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 17, 1998 | Docket: 1323552

Cited 3 times | Published

disabled within the 14-day statutory time frame. See § 440.192(8), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1994). Claimant sought attorney's

Lakeside Baptist Church v. Jones

714 So. 2d 1188, 1998 WL 432630

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 3, 1998 | Docket: 461686

Cited 3 times | Published

discussed during the hearing on the merits. Section 440.192(2), Florida Statutes (Supp.1994), states in

Karell v. Miami Airport Hilton/Miami Hilton Corp.

668 So. 2d 227, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 547, 1996 WL 34057

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 31, 1996 | Docket: 1686942

Cited 3 times | Published

the filing of a petition for benefits under section 440.192. The respondent E/C urges us to find within

Sabal Transport v. Brooks

666 So. 2d 1032, 1996 WL 27880

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 26, 1996 | Docket: 452665

Cited 3 times | Published

costly litigation, and delay. Furthermore, section 440.192(2), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1994), contemplates

Baptist Manor Nursing Home v. Madison

658 So. 2d 1228, 1995 WL 488146

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 17, 1995 | Docket: 439401

Cited 3 times | Published

440.191, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1994), and section 440.192, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1994), did not preclude

City of Crestview v. Howard

657 So. 2d 73, 1995 WL 410682

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 13, 1995 | Docket: 463981

Cited 3 times | Published

claimant's attorney is entitled to a fee under section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1994). We must

Sierra v. Metropolitan Protective Services

188 So. 3d 863, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 14510, 2015 WL 5714621

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 30, 2015 | Docket: 60254356

Cited 2 times | Published

So.2d 752, 764 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); see also § 440.192(8), Fla. Stat. (2011) (“A carrier that does not

Ocean Reef Club, Inc. v. Wilczewski

99 So. 3d 1, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 4352, 2012 WL 934028

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 21, 2012 | Docket: 60312871

Cited 2 times | Published

as a “petition for benefits,” may ensue.15 Section 440.192 of the Florida Statutes gives the right to

Remington v. OCALA/UNITED SELF INSURED

940 So. 2d 1207, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 18217, 2006 WL 3066797

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 31, 2006 | Docket: 1523870

Cited 2 times | Published

93-415, § 25, at 137, Laws of Fla. (codified at § 440.192(2)(g), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1994)). In the decade

MacK v. Westminster Suncoast Manor

929 So. 2d 610, 2006 WL 1210063

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 8, 2006 | Docket: 1726941

Cited 2 times | Published

an aggrieved employee is *612 precluded by section 440.192(3), Florida Statutes (2003), from filing a

Rice v. Reedy Creek Improvement Dist.

924 So. 2d 882, 2006 WL 503232

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 3, 2006 | Docket: 1419747

Cited 2 times | Published

filing a petition for benefits pursuant to Section 440.192, Florida Statutes, when there is not an existing

Clements v. Walt Disney World Co.

819 So. 2d 1014, 2002 WL 1401897

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 1, 2002 | Docket: 1456388

Cited 2 times | Published

within a petition for benefits, as provided by section 440.192, Florida Statutes (2000). The E/C accepted

Denestan v. Miami-Dade County

789 So. 2d 515, 2001 WL 788354

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 13, 2001 | Docket: 2577371

Cited 2 times | Published

notice of denial within 14 days, as required by section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes (1997), constituted a

Garcia v. New Indus. Techniques

678 So. 2d 467, 1996 WL 465097

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 15, 1996 | Docket: 1736952

Cited 2 times | Published

to comply with the pleading requirements of section 440.192, Florida Statutes. We conclude that such an

Shannon v. Cheney Bros. Inc.

98 So. 3d 1228, 2012 WL 4490866, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 16495

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 2, 2012 | Docket: 60312141

Cited 1 times | Published

petition for benefits has been filed under section 440.192, we conclude that the JCC erred in denying

Williams v. State Department of Corrections/division of Risk Management

97 So. 3d 923, 2012 WL 3763680, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 14643

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 31, 2012 | Docket: 60312009

Cited 1 times | Published

So.2d 768, 769 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); see also § 440.192(8), Fla. Stat. (2008). “Successful prosecution

BRONSON'S INC. v. Mann

70 So. 3d 637, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 7242, 2011 WL 1879197

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 18, 2011 | Docket: 2352127

Cited 1 times | Published

821 So.2d 1226, 1228 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Section 440.192, Florida Statutes (2009), provides in pertinent

MD TRANSPORT v. Paschen

996 So. 2d 902, 2008 WL 4949269

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 21, 2008 | Docket: 1317040

Cited 1 times | Published

substantive rather than procedural. The challenge to section 440.192(9), Florida Statutes, was not ruled on by the

Mims v. Confederated Staffing

940 So. 2d 518, 2006 WL 3017240

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 25, 2006 | Docket: 433845

Cited 1 times | Published

under such circumstances, the provisions of section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes (2000), relating to the

Nash v. AMR Corp.

913 So. 2d 699, 2005 WL 2649201

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 18, 2005 | Docket: 1698267

Cited 1 times | Published

prevails in any proceeding before a JCC). Section 440.192(1), Florida Statutes (2000), calls for the

Cagnoli v. Tandem Staffing

888 So. 2d 79, 2004 WL 2481366

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 5, 2004 | Docket: 1327808

Cited 1 times | Published

include a social security number as required by section 440.192, Florida Statutes. Claimant raises a number

Castro v. AT & T WIRELESS SERVICES, INC.

780 So. 2d 917, 2000 WL 1867569

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 22, 2000 | Docket: 1708809

Cited 1 times | Published

440 until the grievance procedure is exhausted. § 440.192(3). "A JCC has no jurisdiction beyond what is

Allen v. Tyrone Square 6 AMC Theaters

731 So. 2d 699, 1999 WL 41098

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 2, 1999 | Docket: 1733722

Cited 1 times | Published

entitled to benefits of this nature. 6. However, § 440.192(8) provides that a carrier, within fourteen days

Daniel Murphy v. Polk County Board of County Commissioners, and Commercial Risk Management

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 3, 2025 | Docket: 71258187

Published

limitation and the relevant tolling provision; and section 440.192, Florida Statutes, governing PFBs.

Christy Siena v. Orange County Fire Rescue and CCMSI

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 20, 2025 | Docket: 71154551

Published

benefits confers jurisdiction on a JCC per section 440.192(9), Florida Statutes (2020), that jurisdiction

Michael Guglielmo v. State of Florida-DOC Zephyrhills C I/Division of Risk Management

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 30, 2025 | Docket: 70962102

Published

which, according to the JCC, he could not yet do. § 440.192(1), Fla. Stat. (specifying when a claimant may

Ortiz v. Winn-Dixie, Inc., Travelers Insurance, and Sedgwick CMS

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 23, 2024 | Docket: 69491845

Published

of employment.” § 440.19(1), Fla. Stat.; cf. § 440.192(1), (3), Fla. Stat. (allowing an employee to file

Robert Schiano v. City of Hollywood Police Deparment/ Employer's Mutual, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 21, 2019 | Docket: 16089875

Published

the presuit resolution process set forth in section 440.192(4), Florida Statutes. We affirm because, in

Jennings v. Habana Health Care Center

183 So. 3d 1131, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 19393, 2015 WL 9438007

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 28, 2015 | Docket: 60252937

Published

192(8) and 440.34(3), Florida Statutes (2014). Section 440.192(8) provides that, within fourteen days of the

Esad Babahmetovic v. Scan Design Florida Inc/ Zenith Insurance Company

176 So. 3d 1006

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 20, 2015 | Docket: 2991549

Published

accepted the employee’s injuries as compensable-” § 440.192(8), Fla. Stat. (2013) (emphasis added). In short

Esad Babahmetovic v. Scan Design Florida Inc/ Zenith Insurance Company

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 3, 2015 | Docket: 2654140

Published

itself and case law indicate. See id.; see also § 440.192(8), Fla. Stat. (2013) (“A carrier that does not

Evelina Cuenca v. Nova Southeastern University and York etc.

160 So. 3d 941, 2015 WL 1578254

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 16, 2015 | Docket: 2650258

Published

fourteen days of its receipt. See § 440.192(8), Fla. Stat. (2013) (requiring carrier to respond

Panzer Law, P. A. v. Palm Beach County School District

150 So. 3d 823, 2014 WL 5099434

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 12, 2014 | Docket: 1443353

Published

benefits (PFB) to meet the requirements of section 440.192, Florida Statutes (2006). Because the JCC erred

Miranda v. Bridge

112 So. 3d 500, 2012 WL 4512762, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 16704

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 3, 2012 | Docket: 60231127

Published

predicated on filing of petition for benefits under section 440.192); Fla. Admin. Code R. 60Q-6.105(3) (providing

Palm Beach County School District v. Blake-Watson

91 So. 3d 176, 2012 WL 1912414, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8559

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 29, 2012 | Docket: 60309826

Published

dispute before filing the PFB, as is required by section 440.192(4), Florida Statutes (2008). During that dispute

Miami-Dade County School Board v. Russ

88 So. 3d 1038, 2012 WL 1929914, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8561

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 29, 2012 | Docket: 60308119

Published

reading of Certain fits with the requirement in section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes, that an E/C in a “response

Florida Department of Transportation v. Rippy

67 So. 3d 1122, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 11176, 2011 WL 2753773

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 18, 2011 | Docket: 60301934

Published

Statutes.” Fla. Admin. Code R. 60Q-6.102(1). Section 440.192 establishes the requirements for the filing

HDV Construction Systems, Inc. v. Aragon

66 So. 3d 331, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 10042, 2011 WL 2535337

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 28, 2011 | Docket: 60301868

Published

disability, permanent in duration. Indeed, section 440.192(3), Florida Statutes (2007), contemplates such

Padilla v. Collins Contracting

22 So. 3d 124, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 16135, 2009 WL 3491034

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 30, 2009 | Docket: 60267013

Published

for benefits for reasons not enumerated in section 440.192(2), Florida Statutes (2006). We do not reach

CTL Distribution, Inc. v. Wood

979 So. 2d 402, 2008 WL 1774157

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 21, 2008 | Docket: 1406747

Published

claim nor elected to "pay and investigate": Section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes (1999), provides that

Office Depot v. Ortega

931 So. 2d 1051, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 10850, 2006 WL 1735115

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 27, 2006 | Docket: 64845485

Published

denial within the statutory period provided in section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes. We summarily affirm the

FLORIDA DIV. OF WORKERS'COMP. v. Cagnoli

914 So. 2d 950, 2005 WL 2898733

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Nov 3, 2005 | Docket: 1781430

Published

include a social security number as required by section 440.192, Florida Statutes. Claimant raises a number

Solsaa ex rel. Solsaa v. Werner Enterprises, Inc.

937 So. 2d 681, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 16159, 2005 WL 2493380

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 11, 2005 | Docket: 64846702

Published

pay compensation3 under section 440.20(2) or section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes (2002), so as to trigger

Sterling v. Seminole County School Board

847 So. 2d 1004, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 5244, 2003 WL 1872490

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 15, 2003 | Docket: 64823414

Published

before filing the petition, as required by section 440.192(3), Florida Statutes (1997). We find no basis

Begyn v. State Business & Professional Regulations

849 So. 2d 336, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 5243, 2003 WL 1872408

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 15, 2003 | Docket: 64823931

Published

his petition for benefits on May 21, 2001. See § 440.192(3), Fla. Stat. (1997) (“the employee must exhaust

Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Compensation Procedure

829 So. 2d 791, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 795, 2002 Fla. LEXIS 1884, 2002 WL 31084673

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 19, 2002 | Docket: 64818760

Published

substantially in the form of a petition under section 440.192(2), Florida Statutes, and shall include a request

Smurfit-Stone Container Corp. v. Taylor

786 So. 2d 1207, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 7575, 2001 WL 584343

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 1, 2001 | Docket: 64805944

Published

meet the pleading requirements laid down by section 440.192. We have apparently held, however, that an

Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Compensation Procedure

795 So. 2d 863, 25 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 866, 2000 Fla. LEXIS 2275, 2000 WL 1508551

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 12, 2000 | Docket: 64808988

Published

substantially in the form of a petition under section 440.192(2), Florida Statutes, and shall include a request

Vilches v. City of Dunedin

738 So. 2d 990, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 9517, 1999 WL 496150

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 15, 1999 | Docket: 64789950

Published

“Petition for Benefits,” in accordance with section 440.192, Florida Statutes (Supp.1994), on December

ITT Hartford v. Cleary

737 So. 2d 567, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 7558, 1999 WL 371355

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 9, 1999 | Docket: 64789438

Published

file a petition for benefits *568pursuant to section 440.192, Florida Statutes (1997). The trial court correctly

Volusia County Fire Services v. Eaby

725 So. 2d 415, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 244, 1999 WL 12964

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 15, 1999 | Docket: 64785932

Published

employer/carrier was therefore obligated under section 440.192(8) to file a notice of denial. The JCC found

Kennedy v. Orlando Shader Realty

711 So. 2d 156, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 5223, 1998 WL 233392

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 12, 1998 | Docket: 64781064

Published

dismissing her petition for benefits pursuant to section 440.192(2), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1994);1 and (ii)

Poutre v. Bee Gee Shrimp

704 So. 2d 145, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 13287, 1997 WL 730286

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 26, 1997 | Docket: 64778257

Published

petition complied fully with the requirements of section 440.192(2), Florida Statutes (1995). We therefore conclude

Alachua County Board of County Commissioners v. Starling

699 So. 2d 310, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 10621, 1997 WL 574616

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 18, 1997 | Docket: 64775862

Published

agent did not comply with the provisions of section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes (1995), in that a notice

Ago

Florida Attorney General Reports | Filed: Sep 30, 1996 | Docket: 3256820

Published

petition for benefits has been filed pursuant to section 440.192, Florida Statutes? 2. If so, may medical information

Mays v. Packers

677 So. 2d 992, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8386, 1996 WL 454789

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 14, 1996 | Docket: 64766508

Published

were substantially revised by the creation of section 440.192, which took effect on January 1, 1994. Ch.

Dayco Products v. Rue

676 So. 2d 58, 1996 WL 378320

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 9, 1996 | Docket: 1318008

Published

identify or itemize the matters set out in section 440.192(2), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1994). If a petition does

Spence v. Trader Publishing Co.

675 So. 2d 974, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 5458, 1996 WL 277020

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 28, 1996 | Docket: 64765511

Published

these petitions. Spence now argues that under section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes (Supp.1994), compensability

Regency Kawasaki & Sea Doo, Inc. v. Sheppard

674 So. 2d 849, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 5182, 1996 WL 262202

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 20, 1996 | Docket: 64765049

Published

Sheppard. As the JCC properly concluded that section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes (Supp.1994), is procedural

In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Compensation Procedure

674 So. 2d 631, 21 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 223, 1996 Fla. LEXIS 827, 1996 WL 268079

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 16, 1996 | Docket: 64765026

Published

before filing a petition for benefits under section 440.192(3), Florida Statutes (1995), any claims for

Sanchez v. Acapulco Plasters & Stucco

668 So. 2d 298, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 1477, 1996 WL 71124

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 21, 1996 | Docket: 64762462

Published

440.191, Florida Statutes (Supp.1994), and section 440.192, Florida Statutes (Supp.1994), seeking the

Wright v. Industrial Automotive

662 So. 2d 1321, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 11581, 1995 WL 642666

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 3, 1995 | Docket: 64760198

Published

filed a Petition for Benefits pursuant to section 440.192, Florida Statutes (1994 Supp.). A Petition

Burdick v. Bob's Space Racers

659 So. 2d 351, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 5734, 1995 WL 321849

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 31, 1995 | Docket: 64758324

Published

filed a petition for benefits pursuant to section 440.192(1), Florida Statutes (Supp.1994). Sitting as

Alcoma Packing Co. v. Cowan

659 So. 2d 345, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 3603, 1995 WL 155565

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 11, 1995 | Docket: 64758320

Published

dismissal within thirty days as required by section 440.192(5), Florida Statutes (Supp.1994). That statute

This Florida statute resource is curated by Graham W. Syfert, Esq., a Jacksonville, Florida personal injury and workers' compensation attorney. Attorney Syfert regularly works with Chapter 440 in the context of workers' compensation claims and represents clients throughout Northeast Florida. For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.