Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 440.20 (2025)
Time for payment of compensation and medical bills; penalties for late payment.
✓ 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
440.20 Time for payment of compensation and medical bills; penalties for late payment.—
(1)(a) Unless the carrier denies compensability or entitlement to benefits, the carrier shall pay compensation directly to the employee as required by ss. 440.14, 440.15, and 440.16, in accordance with those sections. Upon receipt of the employee’s authorization as provided for in s. 440.12(1)(a), the carrier’s obligation to pay compensation directly to the employee is satisfied when the carrier directly deposits, by electronic transfer or other means, compensation into the employee’s account at a financial institution as defined in s. 655.005 or onto a prepaid card in accordance with s. 440.12(1) or transmits the employee’s compensation to the employee’s account with a money transmitter licensed under part II of chapter 560. Compensation by direct deposit, through the use of a prepaid card, or through transmission is considered paid on the date the funds become available for withdrawal by the employee.
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, all insurance carriers, group self-insurance funds, assessable mutual insurers, and the Joint Underwriting Association authorized to write workers’ compensation insurance in this state shall make available a notice in writing to the employer the fact that a state-authorized deductible plan is available. Under this plan, an employer may pay, for each injury for which an employee files a claim under this chapter as a deductible, up to the first $2,500 of the total amount payable under compensable claims related to such injury. An employer shall not be reimbursed for any amount paid under this paragraph; however, the reporting requirements of the employer, relating to injuries required under any provision under this chapter, are not altered or alleviated. The rate base of any workers’ compensation insurance offered pursuant to this chapter shall include the deductible provision authorized by this paragraph. Any amounts paid by an employer pursuant to this paragraph shall not apply in any way to such employer’s experience rating for injury.
(2)(a) The carrier must pay the first installment of compensation for total disability or death benefits or deny compensability no later than the 14th calendar day after the employer receives notification of the injury or death, when disability is immediate and continuous for 8 calendar days or more after the injury. If the first 7 days after disability are nonconsecutive or delayed, the first installment of compensation is due on the 6th day after the first 8 calendar days of disability. The carrier shall thereafter pay compensation in biweekly installments or as otherwise provided in s. 440.15, unless the judge of compensation claims determines or the parties agree that an alternate installment schedule is in the best interests of the employee.
(b) The carrier must pay, disallow, or deny all medical, dental, pharmacy, and hospital bills submitted to the carrier in accordance with department rule no later than 45 calendar days after the carrier’s receipt of the bill.
(3) Upon making initial payment of indemnity benefits, or upon suspension or cessation of payment for any reason, the carrier shall immediately notify the injured employee, the employer, and the department that it has commenced, suspended, or ceased payment of compensation. The department may require such notification to the injured employee, employer, and the department in a format and manner it deems necessary to obtain accurate and timely notification.
(4) If the carrier is uncertain of its obligation to provide all benefits or compensation, the carrier shall immediately and in good faith commence investigation of the employee’s entitlement to benefits under this chapter and shall admit or deny compensability within 120 days after the initial provision of compensation or benefits as required under subsection (2) or s. 440.192(8). Additionally, the carrier shall initiate payment and continue the provision of all benefits and compensation as if the claim had been accepted as compensable, without prejudice and without admitting liability. Upon commencement of payment as required under subsection (2) or s. 440.192(8), the carrier shall provide written notice to the employee that it has elected to pay the claim pending further investigation, and that it will advise the employee of claim acceptance or denial within 120 days. A carrier that fails to deny compensability within 120 days after the initial provision of benefits or payment of compensation as required under subsection (2) or s. 440.192(8) waives the right to deny compensability, unless the carrier can establish material facts relevant to the issue of compensability that it could not have discovered through reasonable investigation within the 120-day period. The initial provision of compensation or benefits, for purposes of this subsection, means the first installment of compensation or benefits to be paid by the carrier under subsection (2) or pursuant to a petition for benefits under s. 440.192(8).
(5) If the employer has advanced compensation payments or benefits to the employee, the carrier shall reimburse the employer for the advanced payments if the employee is entitled to compensation and benefits pursuant to this chapter. The carrier may deduct such reimbursements from the employee’s compensation installments or, if applicable, from payments to the employee ordered by a judge of compensation claims.
(6)(a) If any installment of compensation for death or dependency benefits, or compensation for disability benefits payable without an award is not paid within 7 days after it becomes due, as provided in subsection (2), subsection (3), or subsection (4), there shall be added to such unpaid installment a penalty of an amount equal to 20 percent of the unpaid installment, which shall be paid at the same time as, but in addition to, such installment of compensation. This penalty shall not apply for late payments resulting from conditions over which the employer or carrier had no control. When any installment of compensation payable without an award has not been paid within 7 days after it became due and the claimant concludes the prosecution of the claim before a judge of compensation claims without having specifically claimed additional compensation in the nature of a penalty under this section, the claimant will be deemed to have acknowledged that, owing to conditions over which the employer or carrier had no control, such installment could not be paid within the period prescribed for payment and to have waived the right to claim such penalty. However, during the course of a hearing, the judge of compensation claims shall on her or his own motion raise the question of whether such penalty should be awarded or excused. The department may assess without a hearing the penalty against either the employer or the carrier, depending upon who was at fault in causing the delay. The insurance policy cannot provide that this sum will be paid by the carrier if the department or the judge of compensation claims determines that the penalty should be paid by the employer rather than the carrier. Any additional installment of compensation paid by the carrier pursuant to this section shall be paid directly to the employee by check or, if authorized by the employee, by direct deposit into the employee’s account at a financial institution or by transmission to the employee’s account with a money transmitter licensed under part II of chapter 560.
(b) For medical services provided on or after January 1, 2004, the department shall require that all medical, hospital, pharmacy, or dental bills properly submitted by the provider, except for bills that are disallowed or denied by the carrier or its authorized vendor in accordance with department rule, are timely paid within 45 calendar days after the carrier’s receipt of the bill. The department shall impose penalties for late payments or disallowances or denials of medical, hospital, pharmacy, or dental bills that are below a minimum 95 percent timely performance standard. The carrier shall pay to the Workers’ Compensation Administration Trust Fund a penalty of:
1. Twenty-five dollars for each bill below the 95 percent timely performance standard, but meeting a 90 percent timely standard.
2. Fifty dollars for each bill below a 90 percent timely performance standard.
(7) If any compensation, payable under the terms of an award, is not paid within 7 days after it becomes due, there shall be added to such unpaid compensation an amount equal to 20 percent thereof, which shall be paid at the same time as, but in addition to, such compensation, unless review of the compensation order making such award is had as provided in s. 440.25.
(8)(a) In addition to any other penalties provided by this chapter for late payment, if any installment of compensation is not paid when it becomes due, the employer, carrier, or servicing agent shall pay interest thereon at the rate of 12 percent per year from the date the installment becomes due until it is paid, whether such installment is payable without an order or under the terms of an order. The interest payment shall be the greater of the amount of interest due or $5.
(b) In order to ensure carrier compliance under this chapter, the department shall monitor, audit, and investigate the performance of carriers. The department shall require that all compensation benefits be timely paid in accordance with this section. The department shall impose penalties for late payments of compensation that are below a minimum 95-percent timely payment performance standard. The carrier shall pay to the Workers’ Compensation Administration Trust Fund a penalty of:
1. Fifty dollars per number of installments of compensation below the 95-percent timely payment performance standard and equal to or greater than a 90-percent timely payment performance standard.
2. One hundred dollars per number of installments of compensation below a 90-percent timely payment performance standard.
This section does not affect the imposition of any penalties or interest due to the claimant. If a carrier contracts with a servicing agent to fulfill its administrative responsibilities under this chapter, the payment practices of the servicing agent are deemed the payment practices of the carrier for the purpose of assessing penalties against the carrier.
(9) The department may upon its own initiative at any time in a case in which payments are being made without an award investigate same and shall, in any case in which the right to compensation is controverted, or in which payments of compensation have been stopped or suspended, upon receipt of notice from any person entitled to compensation or from the employer that the right to compensation is controverted or that payments of compensation have been stopped or suspended, make such investigations, cause such medical examination to be made, or hold such hearings, and take such further action as it considers will properly protect the rights of all parties.
(10) Whenever the department deems it advisable, it may require any employer to make a deposit with the Chief Financial Officer to secure the prompt and convenient payments of such compensation; and payments therefrom upon any awards shall be made upon order of the department or judge of compensation claims.
(11)(a) When a claimant is not represented by counsel, upon joint petition of all interested parties, a lump-sum payment in exchange for the employer’s or carrier’s release from liability for future medical expenses, as well as future payments of compensation expenses and any other benefits provided under this chapter, shall be allowed at any time in any case in which the employer or carrier has filed a written notice of denial within 120 days after the employer receives notice of the injury, and the judge of compensation claims at a hearing to consider the settlement proposal finds a justiciable controversy as to legal or medical compensability of the claimed injury or the alleged accident. The employer or carrier may not pay any attorney’s fees on behalf of the claimant for any settlement under this section unless expressly authorized elsewhere in this chapter. Upon the joint petition of all interested parties and after giving due consideration to the interests of all interested parties, the judge of compensation claims may enter a compensation order approving and authorizing the discharge of the liability of the employer for compensation and remedial treatment, care, and attendance, as well as rehabilitation expenses, by the payment of a lump sum. Such a compensation order so entered upon joint petition of all interested parties is not subject to modification or review under s. 440.28. If the settlement proposal together with supporting evidence is not approved by the judge of compensation claims, it shall be considered void. Upon approval of a lump-sum settlement under this subsection, the judge of compensation claims shall send a report to the Chief Judge of the amount of the settlement and a statement of the nature of the controversy. The Chief Judge shall keep a record of all such reports filed by each judge of compensation claims and shall submit to the Legislature a summary of all such reports filed under this subsection annually by September 15.
(b) When a claimant is not represented by counsel, upon joint petition of all interested parties, a lump-sum payment in exchange for the employer’s or carrier’s release from liability for future medical expenses, as well as future payments of compensation and rehabilitation expenses, and any other benefits provided under this chapter, may be allowed at any time in any case after the injured employee has attained maximum medical improvement. An employer or carrier may not pay any attorney’s fees on behalf of the claimant for any settlement, unless expressly authorized elsewhere in this chapter. A compensation order so entered upon joint petition of all interested parties shall not be subject to modification or review under s. 440.28. However, a judge of compensation claims is not required to approve any award for lump-sum payment when it is determined by the judge of compensation claims that the payment being made is in excess of the value of benefits the claimant would be entitled to under this chapter. The judge of compensation claims shall make or cause to be made such investigations as she or he considers necessary, in each case in which the parties have stipulated that a proposed final settlement of liability of the employer for compensation shall not be subject to modification or review under s. 440.28, to determine whether such final disposition will definitely aid the rehabilitation of the injured worker or otherwise is clearly for the best interests of the person entitled to compensation and, in her or his discretion, may have an investigation made. The joint petition and the report of any investigation so made will be deemed a part of the proceeding. An employer shall have the right to appear at any hearing pursuant to this subsection which relates to the discharge of such employer’s liability and to present testimony at such hearing. The carrier shall provide reasonable notice to the employer of the time and date of any such hearing and inform the employer of her or his rights to appear and testify. The probability of the death of the injured employee or other person entitled to compensation before the expiration of the period during which such person is entitled to compensation shall, in the absence of special circumstances making such course improper, be determined in accordance with the most recent United States Life Tables published by the National Office of Vital Statistics of the United States Department of Health and Human Services. The probability of the happening of any other contingency affecting the amount or duration of the compensation, except the possibility of the remarriage of a surviving spouse, shall be disregarded. As a condition of approving a lump-sum payment to a surviving spouse, the judge of compensation claims, in the judge of compensation claims’ discretion, may require security which will ensure that, in the event of the remarriage of such surviving spouse, any unaccrued future payments so paid may be recovered or recouped by the employer or carrier. Such applications shall be considered and determined in accordance with s. 440.25.
(c) Notwithstanding s. 440.21(2), when a claimant is represented by counsel, the claimant may waive all rights to any and all benefits under this chapter by entering into a settlement agreement releasing the employer and the carrier from liability for workers’ compensation benefits in exchange for a lump-sum payment to the claimant. The settlement agreement requires approval by the judge of compensation claims only as to the attorney’s fees paid to the claimant’s attorney by the claimant. The parties need not submit any information or documentation in support of the settlement, except as needed to justify the amount of the attorney’s fees. Neither the employer nor the carrier is responsible for any attorney’s fees relating to the settlement and release of claims under this section. Payment of the lump-sum settlement amount must be made within 14 days after the date the judge of compensation claims mails the order approving the attorney’s fees. Any order entered by a judge of compensation claims approving the attorney’s fees as set out in the settlement under this subsection is not considered to be an award and is not subject to modification or review. The judge of compensation claims shall report these settlements to the Deputy Chief Judge in accordance with the requirements set forth in paragraphs (a) and (b). Settlements entered into under this subsection are valid and apply to all dates of accident.
(d)1. With respect to any lump-sum settlement under this subsection, a judge of compensation claims must consider at the time of the settlement, whether the settlement allocation provides for the appropriate recovery of child support arrearages. An employer or carrier does not have a duty to investigate or collect information regarding child support arrearages.
2. When reviewing any settlement of lump-sum payment pursuant to this subsection, judges of compensation claims shall consider the interests of the worker and the worker’s family when approving the settlement, which must consider and provide for appropriate recovery of past due support.
3. With respect to any lump-sum settlement under this subsection, any correspondence to a clerk of the circuit court of this state regarding child support documentation shall be exempt from any fees or costs ordinarily assessed by the clerk’s office.
(e) This section applies to all claims that the parties have not previously settled, regardless of the date of accident.
(12)(a) Liability of an employer for future payments of compensation may not be discharged by advance payment unless prior approval of a judge of compensation claims has been obtained as hereinafter provided. The approval shall not constitute an adjudication of the claimant’s percentage of disability.
(b) When the claimant has reached maximum recovery and returned to her or his former or equivalent employment with no substantial reduction in wages, such approval of a reasonable advance payment of a part of the compensation payable to the claimant may be given informally by letter by a judge of compensation claims.
(c) In the event the claimant has not returned to the same or equivalent employment with no substantial reduction in wages or has suffered a substantial loss of earning capacity or a physical impairment, actual or apparent:
1. An advance payment of compensation not in excess of $2,000 may be approved informally by letter, without hearing, by any judge of compensation claims or the Chief Judge.
2. An advance payment of compensation not in excess of $2,000 may be ordered by any judge of compensation claims after giving the interested parties an opportunity for a hearing thereon pursuant to not less than 10 days’ notice by mail, unless such notice is waived, and after giving due consideration to the interests of the person entitled thereto. When the parties have stipulated to an advance payment of compensation not in excess of $2,000, such advance may be approved by an order of a judge of compensation claims, with or without hearing, or informally by letter by any such judge of compensation claims, if such advance is found to be for the best interests of the person entitled thereto.
3. When the parties have stipulated to an advance payment in excess of $2,000, such payment may be approved by a judge of compensation claims by order if the judge finds that such advance payment is for the best interests of the person entitled thereto and is reasonable under the circumstances of the particular case. The judge of compensation claims shall make or cause to be made such investigations as she or he considers necessary concerning the stipulation and, in her or his discretion, may have an investigation of the matter made. The stipulation and the report of any investigation shall be deemed a part of the record of the proceedings.
(d) When an application for an advance payment in excess of $2,000 is opposed by the employer or carrier, it shall be heard by a judge of compensation claims after giving the interested parties not less than 10 days’ notice of such hearing by mail, unless such notice is waived. In her or his discretion, the judge of compensation claims may have an investigation of the matter made, in which event the report and recommendation will be deemed a part of the record of the proceedings. If the judge of compensation claims finds that such advance payment is for the best interests of the person entitled to compensation, will not materially prejudice the rights of the employer and carrier, and is reasonable under the circumstances of the case, she or he may order the same paid. However, in no event may any such advance payment under this paragraph be granted in excess of $7,500 or 26 weeks of benefits in any 48-month period, whichever is greater, from the date of the last advance payment.
(13) If the employer has made advance payments of compensation, she or he shall be entitled to be reimbursed out of any unpaid installment or installments of compensation due.
(14) When an employee is injured and the employer pays the employee’s full wages or any part thereof during the period of disability, or pays medical expenses for such employee, and the case is contested by the carrier or the carrier and employer and thereafter the carrier, either voluntarily or pursuant to an award, makes a payment of compensation or medical benefits, the employer shall be entitled to reimbursement to the extent of the compensation paid or awarded, plus medical benefits, if any, out of the first proceeds paid by the carrier in compliance with such voluntary payment or award, provided the employer furnishes satisfactory proof to the judge of compensation claims of such payment of compensation and medical benefits. Any payment by the employer over and above compensation paid or awarded and medical benefits, pursuant to subsection (13), shall be considered a gratuity.
(15)(a) The office shall examine on an ongoing basis claims files in accordance with s. 624.3161 and may impose fines pursuant to s. 624.310(5) and this chapter in order to identify questionable claims-handling techniques, questionable patterns or practices of claims, or a pattern of repeated unreasonably controverted claims by carriers, as defined in s. 440.02, providing services to employees pursuant to this chapter. If the office finds such questionable techniques, patterns, or repeated unreasonably controverted claims as constitute a general business practice of a carrier, as defined in s. 440.02, the office shall take appropriate action so as to bring such general business practices to a halt pursuant to s. 440.38(3) or may impose penalties pursuant to s. 624.4211. The department and office may initiate investigations of questionable techniques, patterns, practices, or repeated unreasonably controverted claims. The Financial Services Commission may by rule establish forms and procedures for corrective action plans and for auditing carriers.
(b) As to any examination, investigation, or hearing being conducted under this chapter, the department and office:
1. May administer oaths, examine and cross-examine witnesses, receive oral and documentary evidence; and
2. Shall have the power to subpoena witnesses, compel their attendance and testimony, and require by subpoena the production of books, papers, records, files, correspondence, documents, or other evidence which is relevant to the inquiry.
(c) If any person refuses to comply with any such subpoena or to testify as to any matter concerning which she or he may be lawfully interrogated, the Circuit Court of Leon County or of the county wherein such examination, investigation, or hearing is being conducted, or of the county wherein such person resides, may, on the application of the department or the office, issue an order requiring such person to comply with the subpoena and to testify.
(d) Subpoenas shall be served, and proof of such service made, in the same manner as if issued by a circuit court. Witness fees, costs, and reasonable travel expenses, if claimed, shall be allowed the same as for testimony in a circuit court.
(e) The department shall publish annually a report which indicates the promptness of first payment of compensation records of each carrier or self-insurer so as to focus attention on those carriers or self-insurers with poor payment records for the preceding year. The department and the office shall take appropriate steps so as to cause such poor carrier payment practices to halt pursuant to s. 440.38(3). In addition, the department shall take appropriate action so as to halt such poor payment practices of self-insurers. “Poor payment practice” means a practice of late payment sufficient to constitute a general business practice.
(f) The Financial Services Commission, in consultation with the department, shall adopt rules providing guidelines to carriers, as defined in s. 440.02, self-insurers, and employers to indicate behavior that may be construed as questionable claims-handling techniques, questionable patterns of claims, repeated unreasonably controverted claims, or poor payment practices.
(16) No penalty assessed under this section may be recouped by any carrier or self-insurer in the rate base, the premium, or any rate filing. The office shall enforce this subsection.
(17) The Financial Services Commission may by rule establish audit procedures and set standards for the Automated Carrier Performance System.
History.—s. 20, ch. 17481, 1935; CGL 1936 Supp. 5966(20); s. 9, ch. 18413, 1937; s. 6, ch. 20672, 1941; s. 2, ch. 23921, 1947; s. 2, ch. 26877, 1951; s. 5, ch. 29778, 1955; s. 1, ch. 59-422; ss. 1, 2, ch. 65-203; s. 2, ch. 67-554; ss. 17, 35, ch. 69-106; s. 13, ch. 74-197; s. 11, ch. 75-209; s. 1, ch. 77-174; s. 5, ch. 77-290; ss. 7, 23, ch. 78-300; ss. 16, 124, ch. 79-40; ss. 12, 21, ch. 79-312; s. 179, ch. 79-400; s. 8, ch. 80-236; s. 277, ch. 81-259; s. 31, ch. 83-215; s. 8, ch. 83-305; s. 7, ch. 84-267; s. 9, ch. 86-171; s. 6, ch. 87-330; ss. 6, 7, ch. 88-203; ss. 16, 43, ch. 89-289; ss. 24, 56, ch. 90-201; ss. 22, 52, ch. 91-1; s. 30, ch. 91-46; s. 26, ch. 93-415; s. 116, ch. 97-103; s. 6, ch. 98-125; s. 17, ch. 2001-91; s. 48, ch. 2001-158; s. 33, ch. 2002-194; s. 53, ch. 2003-1; s. 481, ch. 2003-261; s. 24, ch. 2003-412; s. 2, ch. 2011-174; s. 35, ch. 2011-194; s. 9, ch. 2013-141; s. 3, ch. 2020-63.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 469
cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1945–2026 · leading case: Sanders v. City of Orlando, 997 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 2008).
Sanders v. City of Orlando, 997 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 2008). “Introduction The City asserts that the 2001 amendment that added subsection (c) to section 440.20(11) divested the JCCs of the authority to vacate or set aside lump-sum settlement agreements entered into by claimants who are represented by counsel.”
Checkers Restaurant v. Wiethoff, 925 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). “Section 440.20(4), Florida Statutes, provides in relevant part: .”
Cone Bros. Contracting v. Gordon, 453 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). “1978), as applied, amounts to an unconstitutional taking of the E/C's property without due process of law; (2) whether the lump sum award is in the best interests of the claimant and is reasonable under the circumstances, without resulting in material prejudice to the carrier;…”
City of Miami v. Bell, 606 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). “After the hearing, the judge of compensation claims ordered the City to pay the full amount of past benefits due under the Barragan decision from September 24, 1987, through August 1, 1989, and awarded a 10% penalty pursuant to section 440.20, Florida Statutes (1985), based on…”
City of Clearwater v. Acker, 755 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 1999). “Once a lump-sum payment is authorized and received pursuant to section 440.20, a claimant has the option to invest the funds and offset the effects of inflation so that the purpose of supplemental benefits is satisfied.”
Willette v. Air Prods., 700 So. 2d 397 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). “A separate rule, Florida Administrative Code Rule 38F-3.0191, addresses temporary disability benefits payable on account of industrial accidents that occur on or after January 1, 1994.”
Fla. Erection Serv. Inc. v. Mcdonald, 395 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). “The division has been given additional responsibility, under Section 440.20(16)(a) to examine "on an ongoing basis" claims files in its possession in order to identify "questionable claims handling techniques, questionable patterns of claims, or a pattern of repeated…”
ESIS/Ace Am. Ins. Co. v. Kuhn, 104 So. 3d 1111 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). “Kuhn’s claimed interest in obtaining 00 as a “cushion” justifies the award. Ms. Kuhn argues that we should not disturb the JCC’s conclusion that a 00 advance as a financial “cushion” was in her best interest.”
Greenberg v. Cardiology Surgical Ass'n, 855 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). “Both parties acknowledge that this is a case of first impression, calling for an analysis of legislative amendments to section 440.20, effective 1994. Before amendment, section 440.”
In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 674 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1996). “Subject to the limitations in this subdivision and in subdivision (d), the sanction may consist of, or include, directives of a nonmone-tary nature, or a penalty pursuant to section 440.20 or 440.24, Florida Statutes; or, if imposed on motion and warranted for effective…”
Court of Flags v. Outland, 382 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). “Employer/carrier appeals a worker's compensation order approving a lump-sum advancement pursuant to § 440.20(10), Fla. Stat. Before approving such an advancement, the deputy must determine that it is in the best interest of the claimant, is reasonable under the circumstances of…”
Amendments to Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 603 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 1992). “When benefits challenged on appeal have been abandoned under subdivision (b) above, benefits no longer affected by the appeal are payable within 30 days of the service of the brief together with interest as required under section 440.20, Florida Statutes, *442 from the date of…”
440.20(1): 10 cases
Budget Luxury Inns, Inc. v. Boston, 407 So. 2d 997 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).
Shipp v. State Workers'comp. Trust Fund, 481 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).
North River Ins. Co. v. Wuelling, 683 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996).
Wekiwa Concrete v. Reddick, 396 So. 2d 832 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).
Hg Boddiford Painting Cons., Inc. v. Boddiford, 426 So. 2d 1243 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).
440.20(1)(a): 2 cases
Bussey v. Wal-Mart Store 725, 867 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).
Osceola Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. Arace, 884 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).
440.20(10): 43 cases
Cone Bros. Contracting v. Gordon, 453 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). “1978), as applied, amounts to an unconstitutional taking of the E/C's property without due process of law; (2) whether the lump sum award is in the best interests of the claimant and is reasonable under the circumstances, without resulting in material prejudice to the carrier;…”
Court of Flags v. Outland, 382 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). “Employer/carrier appeals a worker's compensation order approving a lump-sum advancement pursuant to § 440.20(10), Fla. Stat. Before approving such an advancement, the deputy must determine that it is in the best interest of the claimant, is reasonable under the circumstances of…”
Sanford v. Alachua Cnty. Sch. Bd., 425 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
Sullivan v. Mayo, 106 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958).
In Re Florida Workmen's Comp. Rules of Pro., 285 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 1973).
440.20(10)(b): 3 cases
In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 674 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1996). “Subject to the limitations in this subdivision and in subdivision (d), the sanction may consist of, or include, directives of a nonmone-tary nature, or a penalty pursuant to section 440.20 or 440.24, Florida Statutes; or, if imposed on motion and warranted for effective…”
Ridge Pallets, Inc. v. John, 406 So. 2d 1292 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).
In Re Fla. Wkrs.'Comp. Rules, Etc., 374 So. 2d 981 (Fla. 1979).
440.20(11): 16 cases
Sanders v. City of Orlando, 997 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 2008). “Introduction The City asserts that the 2001 amendment that added subsection (c) to section 440.20(11) divested the JCCs of the authority to vacate or set aside lump-sum settlement agreements entered into by claimants who are represented by counsel.”
Daoud v. Matz, 73 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 1954).
Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 795 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 2000).
In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 674 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1996). “Subject to the limitations in this subdivision and in subdivision (d), the sanction may consist of, or include, directives of a nonmone-tary nature, or a penalty pursuant to section 440.20 or 440.24, Florida Statutes; or, if imposed on motion and warranted for effective…”
Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 829 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 2002).
440.20(11)(a): 1 case
Valerio v. Lee Mem'l Health Sys., 858 So. 2d 1227 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003).
440.20(11)(a)(1994): 1 case
Hernandez v. United Contractors Corp., 766 So. 2d 1249 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000).
440.20(11)(b): 5 cases
Sanders v. City of Orlando, 997 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 2008). “Introduction The City asserts that the 2001 amendment that added subsection (c) to section 440.20(11) divested the JCCs of the authority to vacate or set aside lump-sum settlement agreements entered into by claimants who are represented by counsel.”
In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 674 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1996). “Subject to the limitations in this subdivision and in subdivision (d), the sanction may consist of, or include, directives of a nonmone-tary nature, or a penalty pursuant to section 440.20 or 440.24, Florida Statutes; or, if imposed on motion and warranted for effective…”
Lucas v. Englewood Cmty. Hosp., 963 So. 2d 894 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007).
Palm Beach Cty. Sch. Bd. v. Miller-neal, 674 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996).
Czopek v. Great Chemicals, 778 So. 2d 996 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000).
440.20(11)(c): 19 cases
Sanders v. City of Orlando, 997 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 2008). “Introduction The City asserts that the 2001 amendment that added subsection (c) to section 440.20(11) divested the JCCs of the authority to vacate or set aside lump-sum settlement agreements entered into by claimants who are represented by counsel.”
Jacobsen v. Stores, 882 So. 2d 431 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).
Patco Transp., Inc. v. Estupinan, 917 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005).
Valerio v. Lee Mem'l Health Sys., 858 So. 2d 1227 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003).
Metro. Cas. Ins. Co. v. Tepper, 2 So. 3d 209 (Fla. 2009).
440.20(11)(d): 4 cases
Sanders v. City of Orlando, 997 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 2008). “Introduction The City asserts that the 2001 amendment that added subsection (c) to section 440.20(11) divested the JCCs of the authority to vacate or set aside lump-sum settlement agreements entered into by claimants who are represented by counsel.”
Sanford v. Alachua Cnty. Sch. Bd., 425 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
Court of Flags v. Outland, 382 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). “Employer/carrier appeals a worker's compensation order approving a lump-sum advancement pursuant to § 440.20(10), Fla. Stat. Before approving such an advancement, the deputy must determine that it is in the best interest of the claimant, is reasonable under the circumstances of…”
Travelers Ins. Co. v. Taylor, 444 So. 2d 39 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).
440.20(12): 30 cases
ESIS/Ace Am. Ins. Co. v. Kuhn, 104 So. 3d 1111 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). “Kuhn’s claimed interest in obtaining 00 as a “cushion” justifies the award. Ms. Kuhn argues that we should not disturb the JCC’s conclusion that a 00 advance as a financial “cushion” was in her best interest.”
Amendments to Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 603 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 1992). “When benefits challenged on appeal have been abandoned under subdivision (b) above, benefits no longer affected by the appeal are payable within 30 days of the service of the brief together with interest as required under section 440.20, Florida Statutes, *442 from the date of…”
Buono v. City of Riviera Beach, 484 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).
Cone Bros. Contracting v. Gordon, 453 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). “1978), as applied, amounts to an unconstitutional taking of the E/C's property without due process of law; (2) whether the lump sum award is in the best interests of the claimant and is reasonable under the circumstances, without resulting in material prejudice to the carrier;…”
Esad Babahmetovic v. Scan Design Florida Inc/ Zenith Ins. Co., 176 So. 3d 1006 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).
440.20(12)(a): 33 cases
Amendments to Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 603 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 1992). “When benefits challenged on appeal have been abandoned under subdivision (b) above, benefits no longer affected by the appeal are payable within 30 days of the service of the brief together with interest as required under section 440.20, Florida Statutes, *442 from the date of…”
Johnson v. RH Donnelly Co., 402 So. 2d 518 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).
Hertz Rent-A-Car v. Sosa, 670 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996).
Cordell v. Pittman Bldg. Supply, 470 So. 2d 865 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).
Jf Hoff Elec. Co. v. Powell, 485 So. 2d 1290 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).
440.20(12)(b): 17 cases
Cone Bros. Contracting v. Gordon, 453 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). “1978), as applied, amounts to an unconstitutional taking of the E/C's property without due process of law; (2) whether the lump sum award is in the best interests of the claimant and is reasonable under the circumstances, without resulting in material prejudice to the carrier;…”
Amendments to Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 603 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 1992). “When benefits challenged on appeal have been abandoned under subdivision (b) above, benefits no longer affected by the appeal are payable within 30 days of the service of the brief together with interest as required under section 440.20, Florida Statutes, *442 from the date of…”
Prestressed Sys. v. Goff, 486 So. 2d 1378 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).
Structural Sys., Inc. v. Worthen, 463 So. 2d 502 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).
Straw v. Steve Moore Chevrolet, 651 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).
440.20(12)(b)(l): 1 case
Maggard v. Montverde Academy, 505 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987).
440.20(12)(c): 17 cases
Lopez v. Allied Aerofoam/Specialty Risk Servs., 48 So. 3d 888 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010).
Amendments to Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 603 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 1992). “When benefits challenged on appeal have been abandoned under subdivision (b) above, benefits no longer affected by the appeal are payable within 30 days of the service of the brief together with interest as required under section 440.20, Florida Statutes, *442 from the date of…”
Joseph Shannon v. Cheney Bros. Inc. & The Travelers, 157 So. 3d 397 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).
Calderon v. JB Nurseries, Inc., 933 So. 2d 553 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006).
Hattie Bonner v. Miami Dade Pub. Schs./et al., 148 So. 3d 152 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).
440.20(12)(c)(2): 3 cases
ESIS/Ace Am. Ins. Co. v. Kuhn, 104 So. 3d 1111 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). “Kuhn’s claimed interest in obtaining 00 as a “cushion” justifies the award. Ms. Kuhn argues that we should not disturb the JCC’s conclusion that a 00 advance as a financial “cushion” was in her best interest.”
Benson v. Savannah Millwork Co., 929 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006).
Employbridge & Gallagher Bassett Servs., Inc. v. Viviana Llanes Rodriguez, 255 So. 3d 453 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018).
440.20(12)(d): 3 cases
ESIS/Ace Am. Ins. Co. v. Kuhn, 104 So. 3d 1111 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). “Kuhn’s claimed interest in obtaining 00 as a “cushion” justifies the award. Ms. Kuhn argues that we should not disturb the JCC’s conclusion that a 00 advance as a financial “cushion” was in her best interest.”
Workers of Florida v. Williams, 743 So. 2d 609 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999).
Gilliland v. Wood 'N You, 626 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993).
440.20(12)(e): 2 cases
Lopez v. Allied Aerofoam/Specialty Risk Servs., 48 So. 3d 888 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010).
Workers of Florida v. Williams, 743 So. 2d 609 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999).
440.20(121): 1 case
In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 674 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1996). “Subject to the limitations in this subdivision and in subdivision (d), the sanction may consist of, or include, directives of a nonmone-tary nature, or a penalty pursuant to section 440.20 or 440.24, Florida Statutes; or, if imposed on motion and warranted for effective…”
440.20(13): 11 cases
Zarahn v. City of Milton, 433 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).
Santiago v. Orr Indus., Inc., 407 So. 2d 1026 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).
Cone Bros. Contracting v. Gordon, 453 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). “1978), as applied, amounts to an unconstitutional taking of the E/C's property without due process of law; (2) whether the lump sum award is in the best interests of the claimant and is reasonable under the circumstances, without resulting in material prejudice to the carrier;…”
Mcdade v. Palm Beach Cnty. Sch. Dist., 898 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005).
Williams v. State Dep't of Corr./Div. of Risk Mgmt., 97 So. 3d 923 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012).
440.20(13)(c): 1 case
Escambia Cty. Council v. Goldsmith, 500 So. 2d 626 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).
440.20(13)(d): 14 cases
Workers of Florida v. Williams, 743 So. 2d 609 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999).
Buono v. City of Riviera Beach, 484 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).
Travelers Ins. Co. v. Taylor, 444 So. 2d 39 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).
Zarahn v. City of Milton, 433 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).
Union Boiler/FP&L Martin Wrap-Up v. Walker, 461 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).
440.20(14): 7 cases
Mcdade v. Palm Beach Cnty. Sch. Dist., 898 So. 2d 126 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005).
GAB Bus. Servs., Inc. v. Dixon, 739 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999).
Jackson v. Hochadel Roofing Co., 794 So. 2d 668 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).
Great Dane Trailers v. Clark, 520 So. 2d 53 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988).
Grice v. Escambia Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't, 658 So. 2d 1208 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).
440.20(15): 25 cases
City of Clearwater v. Acker, 755 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 1999). “Once a lump-sum payment is authorized and received pursuant to section 440.20, a claimant has the option to invest the funds and offset the effects of inflation so that the purpose of supplemental benefits is satisfied.”
City of Hollywood v. Lombardi, 770 So. 2d 1196 (Fla. 2000).
Escambia Cnty. Sheriff's Dept. v. Grice, 692 So. 2d 896 (Fla. 1997).
HRS DIST. II v. Pickard, 778 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999).
Dixon v. GAB Bus. Servs., Inc., 767 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 2000).
440.20(16): 1 case
Zundell v. Dade Cnty. Sch. Bd., 609 So. 2d 1367 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992).
440.20(16)(a): 1 case
Fla. Erection Serv. Inc. v. Mcdonald, 395 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). “The division has been given additional responsibility, under Section 440.20(16)(a) to examine "on an ongoing basis" claims files in its possession in order to identify "questionable claims handling techniques, questionable patterns of claims, or a pattern of repeated…”
440.20(16)(b)(2): 1 case
Nathanson v. Dep't of Labor & Emp. Sec., Div. of Workers' Comp., 620 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993).
440.20(1l)(a): 1 case
Cabrera v. Outdoor Empire, 108 So. 3d 691 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
440.20(1l)(b): 2 cases
Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 829 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 2002).
Wichman v. Cnty. of Volusia, 110 F. Supp. 2d 1354 (M.D. Fla. 2000).
440.20(1l)(c): 4 cases
Leticia Morales v. Zenith Ins. Co., 152 So. 3d 557 (Fla. 2014).
Raban v. Fed. Express, 13 So. 3d 140 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009).
Risco USA Corp. v. Alexander, 91 So. 3d 870 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012).
Diaz-Llerena v. Spillis, Candela & Partners, Inc., 121 So. 3d 1086 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
440.20(2): 12 cases
Town of Lake Park v. Karl, 642 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994).
City of Miami v. Bell, 606 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). “After the hearing, the judge of compensation claims ordered the City to pay the full amount of past benefits due under the Barragan decision from September 24, 1987, through August 1, 1989, and awarded a 10% penalty pursuant to section 440.20, Florida Statutes (1985), based on…”
Nat'l Distrib. Co. v. Campbell, 632 So. 2d 647 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994).
Robin Tucker, As Assignee of Palm Beach Nightclub Enter., Inc. v. John Galt Ins. Agency, 743 So. 2d 108 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).
Watkins v. Resources Prop. Mgmt., 596 So. 2d 763 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992).
440.20(2)(a): 2 cases
Jones v. City of St. Petersburg, 46 So. 3d 637 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010).
Edward Koren v. City of Kissimmee, & Preferred Governmental Claim Solutions (Fla. 1st DCA 2026).
440.20(2)(b): 1 case
Spotmaster Cleaners v. Special Disability Trust Fund, 580 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
440.20(3): 2 cases
Escambia Cty. Council v. Goldsmith, 500 So. 2d 626 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).
Solsaa ex rel. Solsaa v. Werner Enter., Inc., 937 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005).
440.20(4): 99 cases
Checkers Restaurant v. Wiethoff, 925 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). “Section 440.20(4), Florida Statutes, provides in relevant part: .”
Sch. Dist. of Hillsborough Cnty. v. Dickson, 67 So. 3d 1080 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).
Franklin v. Nw. Airlines, 778 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).
Sierra v. Metro. Prot. Servs., 188 So. 3d 863 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).
Bussey v. Wal-Mart Store 725, 867 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).
440.20(5): 22 cases
Fla. Erection Serv. Inc. v. Mcdonald, 395 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). “The division has been given additional responsibility, under Section 440.20(16)(a) to examine "on an ongoing basis" claims files in its possession in order to identify "questionable claims handling techniques, questionable patterns of claims, or a pattern of repeated…”
Kuhle v. Kirk, 177 So. 2d 329 (Fla. 1965).
Town of Lake Park v. Karl, 642 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994).
Ezell-Titterton, Inc. v. A. K. F. ex rel. P. A. F., 234 So. 2d 360 (Fla. 1970).
Parker v. Brinson Constr. Co., 78 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 1955).
440.20(6): 55 cases
Greenberg v. Cardiology Surgical Ass'n, 855 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). “Both parties acknowledge that this is a case of first impression, calling for an analysis of legislative amendments to section 440.20, effective 1994. Before amendment, section 440.”
Willette v. Air Prods., 700 So. 2d 397 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). “A separate rule, Florida Administrative Code Rule 38F-3.0191, addresses temporary disability benefits payable on account of industrial accidents that occur on or after January 1, 1994.”
Fla. Erection Serv. Inc. v. Mcdonald, 395 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). “The division has been given additional responsibility, under Section 440.20(16)(a) to examine "on an ongoing basis" claims files in its possession in order to identify "questionable claims handling techniques, questionable patterns of claims, or a pattern of repeated…”
E. Indus., Inc. v. Burnham, 750 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000).
Serv. Mgmt. Sys. v. Hood, 790 So. 2d 578 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).
440.20(6)(a): 5 cases
Jones v. City of St. Petersburg, 46 So. 3d 637 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010).
Repub. Waste Servs., Inc. v. Ricardo, 68 So. 3d 934 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).
Rucker v. Just Brakes, 75 So. 3d 807 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).
Citrus Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. State, Dep't of Fin. Servs., Div. of Workers' Comp., 67 So. 3d 1127 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).
West v. Univ. of Miami, 69 So. 3d 398 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).
440.20(7): 55 cases
City of Miami v. Bell, 606 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). “After the hearing, the judge of compensation claims ordered the City to pay the full amount of past benefits due under the Barragan decision from September 24, 1987, through August 1, 1989, and awarded a 10% penalty pursuant to section 440.20, Florida Statutes (1985), based on…”
Fla. Erection Serv. Inc. v. Mcdonald, 395 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). “The division has been given additional responsibility, under Section 440.20(16)(a) to examine "on an ongoing basis" claims files in its possession in order to identify "questionable claims handling techniques, questionable patterns of claims, or a pattern of repeated…”
Town of Lake Park v. Karl, 642 So. 2d 823 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994).
Myers v. Carr Const. Co., 387 So. 2d 417 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980).
Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Viera, 440 So. 2d 49 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).
440.20(8): 29 cases
Steinbrecher v. BETTER CONST. CO., 587 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
Thibodeau v. Sarasota Mem'l Hosp., 449 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).
Greenberg v. Cardiology Surgical Ass'n, 855 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). “Both parties acknowledge that this is a case of first impression, calling for an analysis of legislative amendments to section 440.20, effective 1994. Before amendment, section 440.”
Sigg v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 594 So. 2d 329 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992).
Binimelis ex rel. Binimelis v. M.E.F. Int'l Corp., 424 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).
440.20(8)(a): 2 cases
New Hope Baptist Church v. Duran, 38 So. 3d 170 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010).
Jones v. City of St. Petersburg, 46 So. 3d 637 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010).
440.20(8)(b): 2 cases
Citrus Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. State, Dep't of Fin. Servs., Div. of Workers' Comp., 67 So. 3d 1127 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011).
Alachua Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. Off. OF the STATE, Chief Fin. Officer for the Dep't of Fin. Servs., Div. of Worker's Comp., 138 So. 3d 480 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).
440.20(9): 17 cases
Dep't of Transp. v. Montero, 568 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).
Brazil v. Sch. Bd. of Alachua Cnty., 408 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
Carballo v. Warren Mfg. Co., 407 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).
Etheridge v. McKenzie Tank Lines, Inc., 557 So. 2d 962 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).
Houston-Miller v. U.S. Fire Ins., 668 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996).
440.20(9)(c): 1 case
State, Dept. of Labor & Emp. Sec. v. Summit Consulting, Inc., 594 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).
440.20(jl1): 1 case
Boatright v. City of Jacksonville, 334 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976).
440.20(ll): 1 case
Ocala Geriatric Ctr. v. Davis, 684 So. 2d 228 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996).
440.20(ll)(a): 6 cases
Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 829 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 2002).
In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 674 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1996). “Subject to the limitations in this subdivision and in subdivision (d), the sanction may consist of, or include, directives of a nonmone-tary nature, or a penalty pursuant to section 440.20 or 440.24, Florida Statutes; or, if imposed on motion and warranted for effective…”
Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 795 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 2000).
Cabrera v. Outdoor Empire Inc., 134 So. 3d 573 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).
Cabrera v. Outdoor Empire, 108 So. 3d 691 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
440.20(ll)(b): 8 cases
Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 829 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 2002).
Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 795 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 2000).
In re Amendments to the Florida Rules of Workers' Comp. Procedure, 674 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 1996). “Subject to the limitations in this subdivision and in subdivision (d), the sanction may consist of, or include, directives of a nonmone-tary nature, or a penalty pursuant to section 440.20 or 440.24, Florida Statutes; or, if imposed on motion and warranted for effective…”
Brewer v. Laborfinders of Tampa, 944 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006).
Hanson v. Gimrock Constr., Inc., 807 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).
440.20(ll)(b)(1994): 1 case
Taylor v. Camillus House, Inc., 149 F. Supp. 2d 1377 (S.D. Fla. 2001).
440.20(ll)(c): 9 cases
Brewer v. Laborfinders of Tampa, 944 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006).
Metro. Cas. Ins. Co. v. Tepper, 2 So. 3d 209 (Fla. 2009).
Raban v. Fed. Express, 13 So. 3d 140 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009).
Risco USA Corp. v. Alexander, 91 So. 3d 870 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012).
Leticia Morales v. Zenith Ins. Co., 152 So. 3d 557 (Fla. 2014).
440.20(ll)(d): 1 case
City of Miami v. Mazur, 449 So. 2d 986 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).
440.20(ll)(e): 2 cases
Raban v. Fed. Express, 13 So. 3d 140 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009).
Cabrera v. Outdoor Empire, 108 So. 3d 691 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013).
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.