From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Handley v. Napoleon Steel Contractors

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Jul 23, 1982
417 So. 2d 295 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Opinion

No. AF-183.

July 23, 1982.

Appeal from the Deputy Commissioner Rosemary Usher Jones.

R. Fred Lewis of Magill, Reid, Kuvin Lewis, Miami, for appellant.

Barry A. Pemsler of Richard, Tharpe Pemsler, Miami, for appellees.


This is an appeal from the deputy commissioner's order dismissing appellant's workers' compensation claim against appellees for failure to diligently prosecute. We affirm.

Appellant filed his claim in October 1972, but no action has ever been taken on the claim. Appellant concedes that all benefits due have been paid and no benefits are presently pending. However, he does have a degenerative condition for which he desires to leave his claim open for future benefits.

Appellees paid compensation benefits to appellant until 1977 and made their last payment of medical benefits to appellant sometime before November 1978. Workers' Compensation Rule 11(b) provides:

Any claim, or any petition to modify, in which it affirmatively appears that no action has been taken by request for hearing, filing of pleadings, order of Deputy Commissioner, payment of compensation, provision of medical care, or otherwise for a period of two years is subject to dismissal for lack of prosecution.

Pursuant to the above rule, the deputy commissioner was correct in dismissing appellant's claim.

AFFIRMED.

SHIVERS and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Handley v. Napoleon Steel Contractors

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Jul 23, 1982
417 So. 2d 295 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)
Case details for

Handley v. Napoleon Steel Contractors

Case Details

Full title:WALTER HANDLEY, APPELLANT, v. NAPOLEON STEEL CONTRACTORS, INC., AND HOME…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Jul 23, 1982

Citations

417 So. 2d 295 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Citing Cases

Regal Wood Products, Inc. v. Mendez

The claimant made no showing of good cause for failure to prosecute and under the rule it is mandatory that…