Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Owens-Illinois v. DeLoach
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided January 27, 1997No. 96-1344Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partErvin, Judge
I concur with all the issues addressed in the majority’s opinion, except that reversing and remanding for additional findings for the purpose of determining whether an actual emergency exists. By awarding emergency benefits, which is supported by competent, substantial evidence, the judge of compensation claims (JCC) implicitly made such finding at the hearing below.
The majority has indicated that competent, substantial evidence may support such a finding, but, citing Dayco Products v. Rue, 676 So.2d 58 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996), it decides that because the JCC made no such express finding in the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Acosta Roofing Co. v. GillyardDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1981
- Pierce v. Piper Aircraft CorporationSupreme Court of Florida · 1973
- H & a Frank's Const., Inc. v. MendozaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991
- Philpot v. City of MiamiDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
- Yeargin Const. Co. v. HutchinsonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.