From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Courtesy Construction Corp v. Derscha

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
May 4, 1983
431 So. 2d 232 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

Summary

holding that "[w]ork-released prisoners engaged to work in private enterprise, for compensation paid them by private businesses that are `employers' in every practical sense of the word, are not excluded from [the Workers' Compensation Act]."

Summary of this case from Harris v. Thompson Contractors, Inc.

Opinion

No. AN-213.

May 4, 1983.

Appeal from the Deputy Commissioner.

Steven Kronenberg, of Adams, Kelley, Kronenberg Rutledge, Miami, for appellants.

Jerold Feuer, Miami, for appellees.


In this workers' compensation appeal, appellant Courtesy Construction Corporation, the "employer," contends that the deputy commissioner erred in finding that Derscha, the claimant, was Courtesy's employee within the meaning and application of chapter 440 when Derscha was injured while working at Courtesy's construction site. Derscha was a prisoner on work-release status from Miami North Community Correctional Center. Courtesy arranged for Derscha to perform its construction work, transported him to and from the work site and the detention facility, and paid him $1.00 per hour less than the normal rate for other Courtesy employees performing the same work.

The basis for Courtesy's rather remarkable contention is said to be section 944.49(5), Florida Statutes (1981), which provides that "[n]o prisoner compensated under this section shall be considered as an employee of the state or the [Department of Corrections], nor shall such prisoner come within any other provision of the Workers' Compensation Act." But this reference is to compensation paid a prisoner from the Department's Correctional Work Program Trust Fund, § 944.49(3), for work performed by the prisoner for the Department of Corrections or on loan by the Department to another political subdivision of the state, state agency, or state institution, which reimburses the Department of Corrections its advances from the Fund. § 945.11(1), (2), Fla. Stat.; Department of Health Rehabilitative Services v. O'Neal, 400 So.2d 28, 29-30 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).

Chapter 440 "applies to all employment unless specifically excluded." University of Florida, Institute of Agricultural Services v. Karch, 393 So.2d 621, 622 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Work-released prisoners engaged to work in private enterprise, for compensation paid them by private businesses that are "employers" in every practical sense of the word, are not excluded from chapter 440 coverage.

AFFIRMED.

SHIVERS and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Courtesy Construction Corp v. Derscha

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
May 4, 1983
431 So. 2d 232 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

holding that "[w]ork-released prisoners engaged to work in private enterprise, for compensation paid them by private businesses that are `employers' in every practical sense of the word, are not excluded from [the Workers' Compensation Act]."

Summary of this case from Harris v. Thompson Contractors, Inc.

finding workers' compensation applicable to work-release prisoners engaged to work in private enterprises, since those businesses, in paying for the inmate labor, become “ ‘employers' in every practical sense of the word”

Summary of this case from Vuncannon v. United States
Case details for

Courtesy Construction Corp v. Derscha

Case Details

Full title:COURTESY CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION AND SELF INSURED SERVICES, INC.…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: May 4, 1983

Citations

431 So. 2d 232 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

Citing Cases

Barnard v. State

With an increasing number of inmate work programs designed to approximate the conditions of outside…

Vuncannon v. United States

See S. Tucson v. Indus. Comm'n, 156 Ariz. 543, 549, 753 P.2d 1199 (Ariz.Ct.App.1988) (recognizing trend to…