Cases from cite.case.law:

SHAMROCK- SHAMROCK, INC. a v. REMARK,, 271 So. 3d 1200 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . law to preserve evidence for injured laborer's claim against third-party tortfeasor based on section 440.39 . . .

SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY, a v. CITY OF CORAL SPRINGS,, 187 So. 3d 287 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . against the School Board and the timeliness of the lawsuit against it given the provisions of section 440.39 . . .

ANHEUSER- BUSCH COMPANIES, INC. v. STAPLES,, 125 So. 3d 309 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . The firm also filed a Notice of Lien pursuant to section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes, in the tort . . . The lien was filed pursuant to section 440.39(3)(a), Fla. Stat. 8. . . .

ACS RECOVERY SERVICES, INC. FKI v. GRIFFIN, 723 F.3d 518 (5th Cir. 2013)

. . . . § 440.39; Haw. Rev. Stat. § 386-8; Idaho Code Ann. § 72-223; Iowa Code § 85.22; Me.Rev.Stat. . . .

LOPEZ- LOARCA, v. COSME a k a, 76 So. 3d 5 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . styled as a subrogation claim, but now limited its request for damages to those available under section 440.39 . . . There was, however, no mention of damages on behalf of the carrier, subrogation rights, or section 440.39 . . . The defendants respond that the complaint violates sections 95.11 and 440.39 because it transformed the . . . Section 440.39, Florida Statutes (2000), provides: (4)(a) If the injured employee ... fail[s] to bring . . . Here, the carrier gave the plaintiff notice of its intent to initiate suit under section 440.39(4)(a) . . .

CANNINO, v. PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE CO., 58 So. 3d 275 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . . § 440.39(3)(a). . . .

BRAUN, v. BREVARD COUNTY,, 44 So. 3d 1216 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . the Workers’ Compensation Law,: Brevard County had subrogation rights in these settlement proceeds, § 440.39 . . . But see § 440.39(2), Fla. . . .

In ELECTRIC MACHINERY ENTERPRISES, INC. v. a, 416 B.R. 801 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2009)

. . . Stat. 440.39(7)). . . .

HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY, v. GOFF, Sr. Jr. USA, L. L. C. a a a, 4 So. 3d 770 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . Hartford filed a notice of payment of workers’ compensation benefits in that action pursuant to section 440.39 . . . Hartford contends it has a right to assert a lien pursuant to section 440.39(3)(a), which provides in . . . Thus, section 440.39(3)(a) permits a workers’ compensation carrier to assei’t a lien with respect to . . . conclude that Hartford should be given the opportunity to proceed to a hearing as contemplated by section 440.39 . . . its lien, as appropriate, against those proceeds attributable to the Estate as set forth in section 440.39 . . .

ANDERSON COLUMBIA FCCI v. BREWER, Jr. S., 994 So. 2d 419 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . ’ compensation benefits to Appellee for the paving machine injury, they are entitled, under section 440.39 . . . Because section 440.39 does not grant employers and their insurance carriers such a right, we affirm. . . . of the employee ... to the extent of the amount of compensation benefits paid or to be paid.... ” § 440.39 . . . There is no provision in section 440.39 specifically addressing any interest an E/C may have in a legal . . . Section 440.39 requires action on the part of E/Cs who wish to recoup their expenses. . . .

GAYER, v. FINE LINE CONSTRUCTION ELECTRIC, INC. L. F. I., 2 So. 3d 296 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . that “a special employer using a laborer from a help supply services company has a duty under section 440.39 . . . We hold that Labor Finders had no duty under section 440.39(7) to acquire and preserve evidence that . . .

GAYER, v. FINE LINE CONSTRUCTION ELECTRIC, INC. L. F. I., 970 So. 2d 424 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . that a special employer using a laborer from a help supply services company has a duty under section 440.39 . . . Citing section 440.39(7), Florida Statutes, Gayer argues that Fine Line had a statutory duty to preserve . . . Cambridge Integrated Servs., 888 So.2d 58, 61-62 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (recognizing that section 440.39 . . . The context of the disputed subsection (7) is section 440.39. . . . Additionally, the context of section 440.39(7) does not require another meaning to the term “employer . . .

RISER, v. HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY,, 971 So. 2d 878 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . employer’s insurer, Hartford, ultimately settled the workers’ compensation claim and filed a section 440.39 . . . the extent of the amount of compensation benefits paid or to be paid [to the injured employee],...” § 440.39 . . .

JIMENEZ v. COMMUNITY ASPHALT CORP. f k a CSR, 968 So. 2d 668 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Appellants maintain that all four of these counts are founded on alleged violations of section 440.39 . . . Section 440.39(7), Florida Statutes (2006) part of the Worker’s Compensation Statute, imposes a duty . . . Section 440.39(7) states: (7) The employee, employer, and carrier have a duty to cooperate with each . . . The plaintiff in Yates filed a claim based on an alleged violation of section 440.39(7). . . . However, spoliation claims made pursuant to section 440.39(7) must still meet the elements of common . . .

LUSCOMB v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY BJ s a BJCR, a, 967 So. 2d 379 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . This ease turns on the application of section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes, as in force on the date . . . Under section 440.39(4), Luscomb’s rights of action against third-party tortfeasors then reverted to . . . him, but subject to Liberty Mutual’s subrogation and lien rights as provided by section 440.39(2) and . . . The application of section 440.39(3)(a) is equally daunting. . . . Analysis Section 440.39(3)(a) has produced a continuing line of cases interpreting its daunting directives . . .

PEREZ, v. LA DOVE, INC., 964 So. 2d 777 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . we found for the first time in a different section of the Florida Workers’ Compensation Law, section 440.39 . . . the accident was “foreseeable,” if not inevitable, and hence the employer had a duty under section 440.39 . . . To the contrary, section 440.39(7) contemplates the employer and employee cooperating to seek their respective . . . See § 440.39(3), Fla. . . . Section .440.39(7) states: The employee, employer, and carrier have a duty to cooperate with each other . . .

VASQUEZ v. SORRELLS GROVE CARE, INC. Co. J., 962 So. 2d 411 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . See § 440.39(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (2000). Jones, 932 So.2d at 1108. . . .

JIMENEZ v. COMMUNITY ASPHALT CORP. a a a, 947 So. 2d 532 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . additional claims Jimenez alleged against Rinker based on spoliation of evidence and a violation of section 440.39 . . .

JONES, v. MARTIN ELECTRONICS, INC., 932 So. 2d 1100 (Fla. 2006)

. . . See § 440.39, Fla. Stat. (2000). . . . Section 440.39 of Florida’s workers’ compensation statute ensures both that litigants will not be allowed . . . See § 440.39, Fla. Stat. (2000). . . . See § 440.39(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (2000). . . . and other elements of damage not covered under the workers’ compensation statutory scheme, section 440.39 . . .

SUNSHINE TOWING, INC. FCCI v. FONSECA,, 933 So. 2d 594 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . See §§ 440.23 & 440.39(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (2004). Therefore, the JCC’s order is AFFIRMED. . . .

USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, v. McDERMOTT, 929 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . See §§ 440.39(3)(a), 627.727(6), Fla. Stat. (2002). . . .

YATES, v. PUBLIX SUPER MARKETS,, 924 So. 2d 832 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . following paragraph: We note that the trial court held that the only cause of action allowed by section 440.39 . . . Spoliation of evidence is simply one form of failing to cooperate under section 440.39(7). . . . evidence, and whether such evidence legally amounts to a failure to cooperate or spoliation within section 440.39 . . . In count I plaintiff alleged a statutory basis for suit against her husband’s employer under section 440.39 . . . documents and allowing inspection of premises, but only to the extent necessary for such purpose.” § 440.39 . . . We note that the trial court held that the only cause of action allowed by section 440.39(7) is a spoliation . . .

SUMMIT CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, INC. d b a v. LAWYERS EXPRESS TRUCKING, INC., 913 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . Section 440.39(1), Florida Statutes (1997), allows injured employees to pursue tort claims against third . . . However, pursuant to section 440.39(2), the entity that paid the workers compensation benefits has statutory . . . Therefore, section 440.39(3)(a) requires the injured employee to serve a “notice of suit” upon the employer . . . Express and Canal Insurance seeking to impose a lien on the settlement proceeds pursuant to section 440.39 . . . We disagree- with the Fifth District’s opinion, because section 440.39 does not provide for equitable . . .

McDADE, v. PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT F. A., 898 So. 2d 126 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . wages and medical expenses made in lieu of compensation benefits prior to an award of compensation); § 440.39 . . .

F. POWERS, v. E. R. PRECISION OPTICAL CORPORATION, 886 So. 2d 281 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . But an offset can be allowed to prevent double recovery, see § 440.39(3)(a), Fla. . . .

SHAW, v. CAMBRIDGE INTEGRATED SERVICES GROUP, INC., 888 So. 2d 58 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . . § 440.39(1), Fla. Stat. (2003). . . . . § 440.39(2), Fla. Stat. (2003). . . . .” § 440.39(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (2003). . . . the insurer would have a right to recover its pro rata share, subject to the provisions of section 440.39 . . . Under section 440.39, the insurer is entitled to recover such amounts realized from both the products . . . The insurer contended that pursuant to section 440.39(3)(a) it was entitled to recover from the employee . . . Section 440.39(1) provides that an employee who “is injured ... in the course of his or her employment . . . carrier becomes subrogated to a limited extent for the benefits paid or to be paid to the employee. § 440.39 . . . the disability or medical expenses resulting from an injury in the course of his or her employment. § 440.39 . . . Moreover, § 440.39(3) expressly provides that: the failure by the employer or carrier to comply with . . .

CITY OF LAKELAND v. STAPLETON, 875 So. 2d 784 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . carrier, filed a notice of lien for payment of compensation and medical benefits pursuant to section 440.39 . . . 627 So.2d 572, 573 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993), this court held, en banc, that the applicable statute, section 440.39 . . .

SOUTHLAND CONSTRUCTION, INC. v. GREATER ORLANDO AVIATION,, 860 So. 2d 1031 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . Peoples Gas also urges that section 440.39, Florida Statutes, contained in the workers’ compensation . . . Section 440.39 of the Florida Workers’ Compensation Law provides for compensation to employees when third . . . the extent of the amount of compensation benefits paid or to be paid as provided by subsection (3). § 440.39 . . . in the prosecution of the suit including reasonable attorney’s fees for the plaintiffs attorney. § 440.39 . . .

HUMANA WORKER S COMPENSATION SERVICES, v. HOME EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC., 842 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 2003)

. . . duty arose from HES’s agreement to maintain the ladder, while the statutory duty arose from section 440.39 . . . Mortimer, 689 So.2d 276 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (holding section 440.39(7) imposes duty to preserve evidence . . .

HOME EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC. v. HUMANA WORKER S COMPENSATION, ETC., 815 So. 2d 665 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . against HES asserting, in part, a claim for spoliation of evidence and a claim for violation of section 440.39 . . .

ORLANDO REGIONAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, v. TIZNADO,, 804 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . See § 440.39, Fla. Stat. (1997). . . . Therefore, Tiznado filed a motion to strike the lien, arguing that section 440.39 of the Florida Statutes . . . Section 440.39(3)(a) of the Florida Statutes (1997) provides that an insurer may file a notice of payment . . . Under section 440.39, once the insurer filed its notice of lien it was entitled to obtain a judicial . . . Section 440.39(2) of the Florida Statutes (1997) states, in pertinent part, "If the injured employee . . . Pursuant to section 440.39(2), Florida Statutes, this is a set-off case. . . .

ZURICH, U. S. v. WEEDEN, P. A. S. P. A., 805 So. 2d 945 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . It was Goldman’s position that Zurich had the statutory authority, pursuant to section 440.39(3)(a), . . . Section 440.39, Florida Statutes (2000), creates a right of subrogation for the compensation carrier . . . Under section 440.39(2), If the injured employee or his or her dependents recovers from a third-party . . . See § 440.39(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (2000); see also Circle K Corp./AIG Claims Servs., Inc. v. . . . (emphasis added) § 440.39(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (2000). . . .

JONES, v. ETS OF NEW ORLEANS, INC., 793 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 2001)

. . . ANALYSIS The question before us in this case is a narrow one: whether under section 440.39(3)(a), the . . . Section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes provides in pertinent part as follows: Upon suit being filed, . . . When all of the parts of section 440.39(3)(a) are considered together, the construction that is most . . . See § 440.39(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (1977). . . . See § 440.39(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (1989). . . .

IMC AGRICO MP, INC. v. M. FAULK,, 783 So. 2d 321 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . in the prosecution of the suit including reasonable attorney’s fees for the plaintiffs attorney. § 440.39 . . . Absent a stipulation both as to entitlement to an offset and as to its amount, section 440.39, Florida . . . See § 440.39(1), Fla.Stat. (1987). . . . The section 440.39 provisions limit the amount of the compensation carrier’s set-off to its pro rata . . . Harborside Hosp., 634 So.2d 1129, 1130 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (construing § 440.39(3)(b), Fla. . . .

LINCOLN INSURANCE COMPANY, v. HOME EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC. USA, PCA, 812 So. 2d 433 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . See § 440.39(7), Fla. Stat. (1995); General Cinema Beverages of Miami, Inc. v. . . . a count for common law spoliation of evidence as well as a count claiming a violation of subsection 440.39 . . . The Complaint sets out a claim for Spoliation of Evidence and for Statutory Violations under section 440.39 . . .

MICHIGAN MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. SMOOT, Sr. M. M. P. C. R. LLP,, 129 F. Supp. 2d 912 (E.D. Va. 2000)

. . . . § 440.39(3)(a) (West 1991); N.M. STAT. ANN. § 52-5-17(A) (West 1991). . . . ANN. § 440.39(3)(a); 820 ILL. COMP. STAT. 305/5(b); IOWA CODE ANN. § 85.22(1) (West 1996). . . . ANN. § 440.39(3)(a). . . . ANN. § 440.39(3)(a); N.M. STAT. . . .

MICHIGAN MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. SMOOT, Sr. M. M. P. C. R. LLP,, 128 F. Supp. 2d 917 (E.D. Va. 2000)

. . . . § 440.39(3)(a) (West 1991); 820 Ill.CoMp.Stat. 30%(b) (West 1993); Iowa Code Ann. § 85.22(1) (West . . . Fla.Stat.Ann. § 440.39(3)(a) (emphasis added). . . .

CITY OF HOLLYWOOD, v. LOMBARDI,, 770 So. 2d 1196 (Fla. 2000)

. . . from the E/SA, Lombardi also filed a negligence action in the circuit court, as authorized by section 440.39 . . . See § 440.39(2)-(3), Fla. Stat. (1993). . . . Both parties rely on the same language in section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1999), which under . . . Over the years, section 440.39(3)(a) has undergone a series of changes. See generally Reginald E. . . . Although this Court decided Norman under a prior version of section 440.39, neither the earlier statute . . .

METRIX SOUTH v. P. ROSE C., 758 So. 2d 1259 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . Section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1997) states that in actions by the employee against a tortfeasor . . . The basis for the holding was that a plain reading of section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes precludes . . . Since section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes, provides that the workers’ compensation carrier shall recover . . .

ROLLINS, v. PIZZARELLI,, 761 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 2000)

. . . For example, section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp.1996), provides workers’ compensation carriers . . .

CIRCLE K CORPORATION AIG CLAIMS SERVICES, INC. v. WEBSTER,, 747 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Under section 440.39(3)(a), once a suit is filed (and notice is sent to the employer) against a tortfeasor . . . Generally, section 440.39(3)(b) is designed to prevent settlement between an employee and tortfeasor . . . Section 440.39(3)(b) preserves an employer’s right to obtain equitable distribution if its provisions . . .

BUILDER S SQUARE, INC. v. SHAW,, 755 So. 2d 721 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . requesting preservation of evidence in order to be held liable for spoliation of evidence under section 440.39 . . . See § 440.39(1), Fla. Stat. (1997). . . . See § 440.39(7), Fla. Stat. (1997). . . . recoup some of the compensation benefits paid from the employee’s third party judgment or settlement. § 440.39 . . .

CITY OF HOLLYWOOD v. LOMBARDI,, 738 So. 2d 491 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Under section 440.39(2), the E/SA then became subrogated to Lombardi’s rights against the homeowners . . . The appropriate notice was filed by the E/SA under section 440.39(3), establishing a lien on Lombardi . . . The E/SA maintains, however, that section 440.39 allows no such percentage restriction or cap. . . . See Nikula, 531 So.2d at 331 (quoting § 440.39(3), Fla. Stat. (1981)). . . . We cannot believe the legislature intended such a result in enacting section 440.39(3)(a). . . . Section 440.39, Fla. . . . Sec. 440.39, Fla. . . . Section 440.39, Florida Statutes (1993), provides in part: (1) If an employee, subject to the provisions . . . be paid to each by such third-party tortfeasor in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (a). § 440.39 . . .

ETS OF NEW ORLEANS, INC. v. JONES, 738 So. 2d 958 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . This is an appeal from the equitable distribution, pursuant to section 440.39, Florida Statutes (1997 . . . The relevant statute, section 440.39(3)(a), provides, in pertinent part: Upon suit being filed, the . . . .

WILLIAMSON, v. WATER MANIA, INC. a, 721 So. 2d 372 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . for damages against the employer, we agree with plaintiff that the declaratory action under section 440.39 . . . AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED and REMANDED for proceedings under section 440.39(7), Florida Statutes (1997 . . .

PIZZARELLI a v. ROLLINS, 704 So. 2d 630 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . For example, in worker’s compensation claims, subsection 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp.1996), . . .

CITY OF TAMPA v. NORTON,, 681 So. 2d 811 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . See § 440.39(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (1991). . . . the workers’ compensation laws make no provision for an award of interest in this context as section 440.39 . . .

SPECIAL DISABILITY TRUST FUND, v. COMCAR INDUSTRIES, COMMERCIAL CARRIER CORP., 675 So. 2d 1019 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . In exchange, the employer/self-insured expressly waives the right to a lien pursuant to § 440.39. . . .

GENERAL CINEMA BEVERAGES OF MIAMI, INC. d b a v. MORTIMER, 689 So. 2d 276 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . He asserted that subsection 440.39(7), Florida Statutes (1989), imposes a statutory duty on the employer . . . Subsection 440.39(7) provides: (7) The employee, employer, and carrier have a duty to cooperate with . . . Id. § 440.39(4)(a), Fla.Stat. (1989). . . . Id. § 440.39(4)(b). . . . Id. § 440.39(3)-(4). . . . .

SOUTHEAST RECYCLING CORPORATION v. McCLURE,, 658 So. 2d 670 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . Because section 440.39(7), Florida Statutes (1993), provides that the employee, employer, and carrier . . . The language of section 440.39(7) is unambiguous and provides for a duty to cooperate in the investigation . . . the manufacturer and others as third-party tortfeasors, a clearly proper purpose pursuant to section 440.39 . . .

A. BUSSERT, v. W. HOLLEY,, 653 So. 2d 1146 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . The appellant then moved for equitable distribution pursuant to section 440.39, Florida Statutes (1993 . . . limit the lienor’s recovery to the amount of the appellant’s net tort recovery pursuant to section 440.39 . . .

CENTURY ELEVATOR CO. v. SPINOS,, 652 So. 2d 451 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . Under section 440.39, Florida Statutes, the worker’s compensation carrier is subrogated to the rights . . . of the employee to the extent of benefits recovered from the tort-feasor. § 440.39(2), Fla.Stat. (1993 . . . judgment or settlement recovery, to the extent the court determines the carrier’s pro rata share. § 440.39 . . .

HOLMES COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, v. DUFFELL,, 651 So. 2d 1176 (Fla. 1995)

. . . Our conclusion is buttressed by the related statutory provisions of section 440.39(1) which provide that . . . same time ... pursue his remedy by action at law or otherwise against [a] third-party tortfeasor.” § 440.39 . . . Duffell is entitled to pursue his claim against Lewis as expressly set forth in sections 440.11(1) and 440.39 . . .

CANDYWORLD, INC. v. GRANITE STATE INSURANCE COMPANY, a, 652 So. 2d 1165 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . See § 440.39(2), Fla.Stat. (1993). . . .

NORTHBROOK PROPERTY AND CASUALTY COMPANY, INC. v. B. COLTON,, 641 So. 2d 440 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . Northbrook has a lien, under the workers’ compensation law, chapter 440.39, Florida Statutes (1989), . . .

AGC RISK MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC. v. OROZCO,, 635 So. 2d 1034 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . AGC’s predecessor in interest filed a Notice Of Lien pursuant to section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes . . . Section 440.39(3)(a) provides a means for a workers’ compensation carrier to recoup funds it has paid . . .

H. MURRAY, v. HARBORSIDE HOSPITAL, INC. St., 634 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . Gleaves, 586 So.2d 458 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); § 440.39(3)(b), Fla.Stat. . . .

DENT, v. FLORIDA POWER LIGHT CO. a a R. J. s, 633 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . Sections 440.11 and 440.39 also read substantively the same as they did in 1941. . . .

SUN BANK SOUTH FLORIDA, N. A. P. A. C. L. G. CT v. BAKER,, 632 So. 2d 669 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . Section 440.39, Florida Statutes (1993), contains a detailed formulation of the employer/carrier’s subro-gation . . . CNS’s suit here seeks the right of full recovery against settlement proceeds, without any section 440.39 . . . providers to pursue claims against settlement proceeds, it could have expressly so stated in section 440.39 . . .

RICKETTS, v. HAYNES, L., 630 So. 2d 1232 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . Therefore, Andrews cannot be considered a third-party tort-feasor and be liable as such under section 440.39 . . . See § 440.39(1) Fla. Stat. (1991). . . . See § 440.39(1), Fla.Stat. (1991). . . .

CITY OF LAKELAND v. H. MORRIS,, 627 So. 2d 572 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . The court based its decision on section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1991), which expressly states . . .

E. BRUNER C. v. CATERPILLAR, INC. f k a, 627 So. 2d 46 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . benefits, for which the workers’ compensation insurer had a statutory subrogation right under section 440.39 . . . section 768.76(1) is not allowed due to the statutory subrogation right which pertains under section 440.39 . . . Under section 440.39(2), Florida Statutes, an employer or workers’ compensation insurer has a right of . . .

BARBOSA, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY,, 617 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . Section 440.39(7), imposes a duty on the carrier to cooperate with the employee “in investigating and . . . Bondu, 484 So.2d 7 (Fla.1986), section 440.39(7), does not impose a-duty on a carrier to preserve and . . . We find that section 440.39(7), is “plain and unambiguous and it should be construed within its four . . .

DELEHANTY, v. CORONET INSURANCE COMPANY,, 619 So. 2d 990 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . the worker’s compensation lien, “plus the amount of attorney’s fees and costs permitted by section 440.39 . . . from his PIP carrier the above-referenced “amount of attorney’s fees and costs permitted by section 440.39 . . .

SHOVA, v. ELLER,, 606 So. 2d 400 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Section 440.39, Fla.Stat. (1989). . . . .

TARMAC OF FLORIDA LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. GWALTNEY,, 604 So. 2d 907 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Gwaltney sued the tortfeasor and Liberty Mutual filed a lien in that action pursuant to section 440.39 . . . The issue before us, quite simply, is whether the trial court has the discretion, under section 440.39 . . .

SAUNDERS, v. T. ALOIS,, 604 So. 2d 18 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Florida Worker’s Compensation Statute section 440.39(5) (1989), providing that settlement between the . . .

COMMERCIAL UNION INSURANCE COMPANY, v. FALLEN, 603 So. 2d 610 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . third parties and obtained judgments against which CUI filed subrogation liens pursuant to section 440.39 . . . Section 440.39(3)(a) provides: In all claims or actions at law against a third-party tortfeasor, the . . . It appears to us that the use of the word "judgment" in section 440.39(3)(a) includes all of the rights . . .

UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA STATE OF FLORIDA v. GLEAVES,, 586 So. 2d 458 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . assuming jurisdiction to resolve the parties’ dispute over a third-party tort-feasor lien when section 440.39 . . .

C. VOLK, v. GALLOPO,, 585 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . compute the equitable distribution rate as set forth in the workers’ compensation statute, section 440.39 . . . The language of section 440.39(3)(a) creates an equitable distribution formula to be applied when an . . . Furthermore, section 440.39(3)(a) does not provide for the inclusion in the equitable distribution formula . . . Section 440.39(3)(a) states, in pertinent part: In all claims or actions at law against a third-party . . . (emphasis added) Section 440.39(3)(a) provides that the workers’ compensation carrier shall recover from . . .

SUN BANK v. JAKUBOWSKI, 583 So. 2d 782 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . Section 440.39 creates a right of subrogation for the compensation carrier in any action against a third . . . Actions by the employee are governed by section 440.39(3)(a) which provides in part: In all claims or . . . Section 440.39(3)(a) provides that notice of the employee’s suit shall be served upon the employer and . . .

KILPATRICK, v. CITY OF MIAMI,, 583 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . Co., 414 So.2d 245 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), aff'd, 441 So.2d 1070 (Fla.1983); §§ 440.39(3)(a), 440.49, Fla.Stat . . .

ATLANTA CASUALTY COMPANY, a v. YADEVIA,, 579 So. 2d 213 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . the worker’s compensation lien, “plus the amount of attorney’s fees and costs permitted by section 440.39 . . .

FORTUNE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. McGHEE,, 571 So. 2d 546 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . reimbursement represented the compensation carrier’s pro rata share of attorney’s fees and costs under section 440.39 . . . benefits in the amount of $2,000 plus the amount' of attorney’s fees and costs permitted by section 440.39 . . . establish the compensation carrier’s pro rata share of attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to section 440.39 . . .

ZURICH- AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, v. L. LEWIS, 570 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . . § 440.39(3)(a), Fla.Stat. (1983). . . .

FONTAINEBLEAU HOTEL Co. v. WILCOX,, 570 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . First, the 1981 version of Section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes governs this case as to the pro rata . . . because of comparative negligence or because of limits of insurance coverage and collecti-bility.” § 440.39 . . . the carrier herein a pro rata share of the net proceeds of the said settlement at less than 100%, § 440.39 . . . committed two errors in calculating the pro rata share percentage due to the carrier herein under Section 440.39 . . . punitive damages, no less than compensatory damages, are part of “the full value of damages sustained,” § 440.39 . . .

FIRST SOUTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY, v. BLOCK s, 567 So. 2d 960 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . comparative negligence so as to warrant reduction of a worker’s compensation lien pursuant to section 440.39 . . .

EMPLOYER SERVICE CORP. Co. v. C. SZLOSEK, J. M. D. V. M. D. P. J. M. D. P. A., 566 So. 2d 897 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . any event, ten days after that phone conversation, the appellants filed a lien pursuant to section 440.39 . . .

PAYLESS OIL COMPANY v. R. REYNOLDS,, 565 So. 2d 737 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . Under section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1983), a workers’ compensation carrier is entitled to a . . . The burden of proof will be upon the employee. § 440.39(3), Fla.Stat. (1983). . . . .

SUBURBAN PROPANE, v. ESTATE OF PITCHER,, 564 So. 2d 1118 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . Petitioner asserts that the order is not authorized under Section 440.39(7), Florida Statutes (1989), . . . It is the estate’s contention that Section 440.39(7), Florida Statutes (1989), requires the E/C to cooperate . . . potential claim against a third-party tortfeasor, Thus, the duty to cooperate set forth in section 440.39 . . . this case on the above bases, we do not consider other related issues such as: (1) whether Section 440.39 . . . See section 440.39(3)(a), in which the legislature acknowledged that an employer may not comply with . . . First, because the statute (Section 440.39(7), Florida Statutes (1989)), which requires the employee, . . . nor is there any recorded legislative interpretation of this subsection, which was added to section 440.39 . . . I consider that section 440.39(7) should be read in pari materia with both Florida Workers’ Compensation . . . , after considering rule 4.090(a) and section 440.30 in pari materia with the provisions of section 440.39 . . . I find nothing in section 440.39(3)(a) that weakens this statement. . . .

A. ARONE, v. SHERWOOD, a S. FEISCO,, 561 So. 2d 1269 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . Subsequently Birdsall (and its carrier FEISCO) filed a lien, pursuant to section 440.39(3)(a), Fla.Stat . . . Section 440.39(3)(a) allows the carrier to obtain a lien on Arone’s settlement proceeds. . . .

MANFREDO, v. EMPLOYER S CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,, 560 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. 1990)

. . . . § 440.39(3)(a), Fla.Stat. (1983) (emphasis added). . . . Michigan Mutual Insurance, 531 So.2d 330 (Fla.1988), and held that the insurer, which, under section 440.39 . . . insurer filed a notice of lien for payment of compensation and medical benefits pursuant to section 440.39 . . . In construing section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1981), we held that “the carrier’s lien shall be . . .

LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. BATCH AIR UNIVERSAL INC. a, 559 So. 2d 1189 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . years following the employee’s death, to either intervene in any pending litigation pursuant to Section 440.39 . . . , Florida Statutes (1953), or to institute an action itself pursuant to Section 440.39(4)(a), Florida . . .

U. S. FOUNDRY MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, v. McKELVEY, 554 So. 2d 661 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . compensation lienor with offsets for future benefits to be paid to the employee as required by section 440.39 . . .

ROCKHAULERS, INC. v. DAVIS,, 554 So. 2d 654 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . See § 440.39(1), Fla.Stat. (1987). . . . The section 440.39 provisions limit the amount of the compensation carrier’s set-off to its pro rata . . . See § 440.39(3)(b), Fla.Stat. (1987). . . . entitled to a set off, to be determined by the trial court in accordance with the provisions of section 440.39 . . .

WILLIAMS HEATING AND AIR CONDITIONING COMPANY, v. WILLIAMS,, 551 So. 2d 559 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . Aetna’s right to a lien claiming the carrier failed to file a notice of that lien as permitted by § 440.39 . . . The legislature addressed this problem in 1959 with the addition of subsection (3)(b) to § 440.39, providing . . . Under section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp.1986), the carrier’s pro-rata share of the injured . . . Section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp 1986) provides in pertinent part: Upon suit being filed, . . .

C L TRUCKING, v. CORBITT,, 546 So. 2d 1185 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . They raise as support for their position the fact that the carrier did not comply with section 440.39 . . . Section 440.39, Florida Statutes (1985) is long and in most parts not directly applicable to the decision . . . But given the two requirements at the end of section 440.39(3)(a), mentioned above, we are convinced . . .

EMPLOYER S CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, WORKERS COMPENSATION LIENHOLDER, v. MANFREDO,, 542 So. 2d 1365 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . Insurer) thereafter filed a notice of lien for payment of compensation and medical benefits under § 440.39 . . . the process utilized by the trial court results from an incorrect interpretation and application of § 440.39 . . .

TUFCO, INC. v. JERNIGAN,, 533 So. 2d 325 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

. . . In this equitable distribution case brought under section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1985), the . . . Woodard, 433 So.2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983), we noted that section 440.39(3)(a) is silent as to how pro . . .

NIKULA, v. MICHIGAN MUTUAL INSURANCE, MICHIGAN MUTUAL INSURANCE, v. NIKULA,, 531 So. 2d 330 (Fla. 1988)

. . . The district court held that under paragraph 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1981), where a comparatively . . . WORKER’S DAMAGES — ALSO DETERMINED BY THE COURT-HOW IS THE LIEN REDUCTION CALCULATED PURSUANT TO SECTION 440.39 . . . Nikula then asked the trial court to determine the amount of the lien under paragraph 440.39(3)(a), Florida . . . because of comparative negligence or because of limits of insurance coverage and collecti-bility. § 440.39 . . . In summary, we answer the certified question by holding that, under paragraph 440.39(3)(a), where settlements . . .

PEREZ, v. PENNSUCO CEMENT AGGREGATES, 529 So. 2d 1259 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

. . . First Nat'l Bank of Tampa, 306 So.2d 193, 193-94 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975); § 440.39(3)(a), Fla.Stat. (1971) . . . 385 So.2d 153, 154 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980) (interpreting 1977 version of compensation lien statute); § 440.39 . . .

LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. CHAMBERS, 526 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 1988)

. . . 3d DCA 1986), the court below held that assessing a worker’s compensation lien filed under section 440.39 . . .

SALISBURY v. CHESTNUT OFFICE EQUIPMENT COMPANY, INC., 28 Fla. Supp. 2d 52 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1988)

. . . Salisbury responds in her representative capacity, as clarified by reviewing Section 440.39(3)(a), Florida . . . non-duplication of recovery” provisions of Section 631.61 are in conflict with Section 627.7372 and Section 440.39 . . . to the secondary argument of the parties, this Court concludes that the lien provided for in Section 440.39 . . . of this reduction along with the attorney who does not receive compensation as provided in Section 440.39 . . .

AMERICAN MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. DECKER, Jr. VINCO PLASTERING DRYWALL, v. P. MAHAN, M. D. W. P. M. D. P. A. UNDERWRITERS ADJUSTING CO. THE FAMILY MART, v. SCHNEIDER, M. D. A. M. D. P. A. d b a FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION, v. HUMANA OF FLORIDA, INC. d b a M. D. A. M. D. P. A. J., 518 So. 2d 315 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . the statute regulating collateral sources of benefits in medical malpractice litigation, and section 440.39 . . . Within that backdrop, the workers’ compensation law, specifically section 440.39, Florida Statutes, expressly . . . See § 440.39, Fla.Stat. (1983). . . . of magnification of a work-connected injury by a third party tortfeasor is contemplated by section 440.39 . . . us in either the appellees’ briefs or oral arguments detracts from our determination that sections 440.39 . . .

SANDREW CONSTRUCTION v. D. DeFOURNY,, 515 So. 2d 1351 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . DeFourny subsequently moved to set aside the carrier’s section 440.39 lien. . . . With these two definitions in mind, we now examine the provisions of section 440.39. . . . See § 440.39(4)(a), Fla.Stat. (1981). . . . Since the clear legislative intent behind the section 440.39(3)(a) lien is to avoid a double recovery . . . See § 440.39(3)(a). . . .

W. GEIGER, v. GUILFORD COLLEGE COMMUNITY VOLUNTEER FIREMEN S ASSOCIATION, INC., 668 F. Supp. 492 (M.D.N.C. 1987)

. . . Section 440.39 of the Florida Workers’ Compensation Act allows an employer and its insurance carrier . . .

BRANDT Ms v. PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY,, 511 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . Because we conclude that the trial court did not properly apply the formula set forth in Section 440.39 . . . and future benefits paid by it and apportion Brandt’s attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to Section 440.39 . . . Before Section 440.39 was amended in 1983 to expressly direct the proration of the employee’s attorney . . . See § 440.39(3)(a), Fla.Stat. (1983) (“Subject to this deduction [for the Employer’s pro rata share of . . . Because Section 440.39 utilizes the ratio of recovery costs to gross recovery to apportion attorney’s . . .

COON, v. CONTINENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY, c o, 511 So. 2d 971 (Fla. 1987)

. . . narrow issue before us is the construction of a portion of Florida’s Worker’s Compensation Law, section 440.39 . . . In the case at bar, we agree with Continental that the proration requirement in section 440.39(3)(a) . . . Finally, we note that the overwhelming weight of authority supports the interpretation we accord section 440.39 . . . Section 440.39(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1985), which provides for worker’s compensation subrogation rights . . .

CHAMBERS v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY,, 511 So. 2d 608 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . The order below assessing a workers’ compensation lien filed under section 440.39, Florida Statutes ( . . .

MICHIGAN MUTUAL INSURANCE, v. NIKULA,, 509 So. 2d 334 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . WORKER’S DAMAGES — ALSO DETERMINED BY THE COURT-HOW IS THE LIEN REDUCTION CALCULATED PURSUANT TO SECTION 440.39 . . . statute, governing how the carrier’s recovery on a workers’ compensation lien is prorated, is section 440.39 . . .