From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

BOWE SEPTIC TANK SERVICE v. GROOMS

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
May 19, 1981
397 So. 2d 721 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

Opinion

No. WW-482.

April 7, 1981. Rehearing Denied May 19, 1981.

Appeal from the Deputy Commissioner.

John R. Gierach, of Gierach Ewald, Orlando, for appellants.

Irvin A. Meyers and Gary J. Boynton, of Meyers, Mooney Adler, Orlando, for appellee.


Employer/carrier appeal a workers' compensation order which we affirm except as to the amount of the attorney's fee awarded. In making the award the deputy commissioner indicated that he had considered the various criteria listed in § 440.34(1), Florida Statutes, and Lee Engineering v. Fellows, 209 So.2d 454 (Fla. 1968), specifically noting that the case involved 45 hours of the attorney's time and resulted in benefits to the claimant of over $67,000 (present value). However, the record shows that employer/carrier was contesting only a portion of these benefits, and that the case presented no novel or unusual issues of special difficulty. In these circumstances we conclude that the $9,500 fee awarded is excessive and apparently based in part on benefits not controverted.

The order appealed is therefore affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded for redetermination of an appropriate attorney's fee.

SHIVERS, J., and WOODIE A. LILES (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.


Summaries of

BOWE SEPTIC TANK SERVICE v. GROOMS

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
May 19, 1981
397 So. 2d 721 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)
Case details for

BOWE SEPTIC TANK SERVICE v. GROOMS

Case Details

Full title:BOWE SEPTIC TANK SERVICE ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. HENRY GROOMS, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: May 19, 1981

Citations

397 So. 2d 721 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

Citing Cases

Steel Fabricators, Inc. v. Jordan

However, in departing from the percentage formula the judge referred to certain factors which do not comport…