Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 440.192 (2025)

Procedure for resolving benefit disputes.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

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.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 91 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1995–2026 · leading case: In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 674 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1996).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 674 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1996). · cites it 34× “The docketing judge’s ruling on specificity under section 440.192, Florida Statutes, or on the issue of whether the allegations contained in the petition were well grounded as required under section 440.”

Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 829 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 2002). · cites it 35× “This rule defines the types of claims not included in a petition for benefits filed under section 440.192, Florida Statutes, that bypass the request-for-assistance process in section 440.”

Checkers Restaurant v. Wiethoff, 925 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). · cites it 7× “And while an E/C's failure to respond to a petition for benefits might be treated as an implicit denial of the petition for certain other purposes, [1] an E/C's failure to respond to a section 440.192 petition does not interrupt the 120-day period and does not avoid the section…”

Bussey v. Wal-Mart Store 725, 867 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). · cites it 14× “Section 440.192 outlines the procedure for resolving benefit disputes.”

North River Ins. Co. v. Wuelling, 683 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). · cites it 10× “Section 440.192 sets out the mechanism for the employee to recover the benefits which he has not received and to which he believes he is entitled.”

Morris v. Dollar Tree Store, 869 So. 2d 704 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). · cites it 7× “The appellant next asserts the JCC erred in denying her, as the prevailing party, reimbursement of costs associated with certified mail mandated by section 440.192(1) for the filing and service of petitions for benefits.”

Aguilera v. Inservices, Inc., 905 So. 2d 84 (Fla. 2005). · cites it 5× “And section 440.192, Florida Statutes (2000), provides a procedure for resolving any benefit disputes between a carrier and a claimant and sets strict deadlines for dispute resolution.”

Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 795 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 2000). · cites it 27× “This rule defines the types of claims not included in a petition for benefits filed under section 440.192, Florida Statutes, that bypass the request-for-assistance process in section 440.”

City of Crestview v. Howard, 657 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). · cites it 12× “1994), such carrier "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 in the reasonable investigation.”

Cagnoli v. Tandem Staffing, 888 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). · cites it 5× “Claimant, Ricardo Cagnoli, challenges a final order striking his petition for workers' compensation benefits for failing to include a social security number as required by section 440.192, Florida Statutes. Claimant raises a number of issues, including whether the requirement of…”

Avalon Ctr. v. Hardaway, 967 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). · cites it 5× “§ 440.192(2)(h), Fla. Stat. (2006). We agree with the E/C that section 440.”

Russell Corp. v. Brooks, 698 So. 2d 1334 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). · cites it 5× “The carrier's failure to file a notice of denial with the division in response to a petition for benefits sent by certified mail violated section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes (Supp.”

Show all 91 citing cases →

— 440.192(1) — 11 cases

Bussey v. Wal-Mart Store 725, 867 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). “Section 440.192 outlines the procedure for resolving benefit disputes.”

In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 674 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1996). “The docketing judge’s ruling on specificity under section 440.192, Florida Statutes, or on the issue of whether the allegations contained in the petition were well grounded as required under section 440.”

Morris v. Dollar Tree Store, 869 So. 2d 704 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). “The appellant next asserts the JCC erred in denying her, as the prevailing party, reimbursement of costs associated with certified mail mandated by section 440.192(1) for the filing and service of petitions for benefits.”

Nash v. AMR Corp., 913 So. 2d 699 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005).

Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 829 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 2002). “This rule defines the types of claims not included in a petition for benefits filed under section 440.192, Florida Statutes, that bypass the request-for-assistance process in section 440.”

— 440.192(2) — 13 cases

Lakeside Baptist Church v. Jones, 714 So. 2d 1188 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).

Baptist Manor Nursing Home v. Madison, 658 So. 2d 1228 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).

— 440.192(2)(a) — 3 cases

Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 795 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 2000). “This rule defines the types of claims not included in a petition for benefits filed under section 440.192, Florida Statutes, that bypass the request-for-assistance process in section 440.”

Padilla v. Collins Contracting, 22 So. 3d 124 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009).

— 440.192(2)(b) — 1 case

Burdick v. Bob's Space Racers, 659 So. 2d 351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).

— 440.192(2)(g) — 1 case

Remington v. Ocala/united Self Insured, 940 So. 2d 1207 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006).

— 440.192(2)(h) — 1 case

Avalon Ctr. v. Hardaway, 967 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). “§ 440.192(2)(h), Fla. Stat. (2006). We agree with the E/C that section 440.”

— 440.192(2)(i) — 2 cases

Panzer Law, P. A. v. Palm Beach Cnty. Sch. Dist., 150 So. 3d 823 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).

Burdick v. Bob's Space Racers, 659 So. 2d 351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).

— 440.192(2X1) — 1 case

— 440.192(3) — 12 cases

Diestel v. Winfrey Plumbing, Inc., 668 So. 2d 283 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996).

Soriano v. Gold Coast Aerial Lift, Inc., 705 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).

MacK v. Westminster Suncoast Manor, 929 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006).

— 440.192(4) — 6 cases

Baptist Manor Nursing Home v. Madison, 658 So. 2d 1228 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).

Robert Schiano v. City of Hollywood Police Deparment/ Emp.'s Mut., Inc. (Fla. 2d DCA 2019).

Jennings v. Habana Health Care Ctr., 183 So. 3d 1131 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).

— 440.192(5) — 6 cases

Panzer Law, P. A. v. Palm Beach Cnty. Sch. Dist., 150 So. 3d 823 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).

Kennedy v. Orlando Shader Realty, 711 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).

— 440.192(7) — 4 cases

Smurfit-Stone Container Corp. v. Taylor, 786 So. 2d 1207 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).

Kennedy v. Orlando Shader Realty, 711 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).

Palm Beach Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. Blake-Watson, 91 So. 3d 176 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012).

— 440.192(8) — 35 cases

North River Ins. Co. v. Wuelling, 683 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). “Section 440.192 sets out the mechanism for the employee to recover the benefits which he has not received and to which he believes he is entitled.”

Checkers Restaurant v. Wiethoff, 925 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). “And while an E/C's failure to respond to a petition for benefits might be treated as an implicit denial of the petition for certain other purposes, [1] an E/C's failure to respond to a section 440.192 petition does not interrupt the 120-day period and does not avoid the section…”

Bussey v. Wal-Mart Store 725, 867 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). “Section 440.192 outlines the procedure for resolving benefit disputes.”

City of Crestview v. Howard, 657 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). “1994), such carrier "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 in the reasonable investigation.”

Russell Corp. v. Brooks, 698 So. 2d 1334 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). “The carrier's failure to file a notice of denial with the division in response to a petition for benefits sent by certified mail violated section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes (Supp.”

— 440.192(9) — 3 cases

Farnam v. U.S. Sugar Corp., 9 So. 3d 41 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009).

Md Transp. v. Paschen, 996 So. 2d 902 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008).

Christy Siena v. Orange Cnty. Fire Rescue & CCMSI (Fla. 1st DCA 2025).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.