Florida Department Of Transportation v. Jimmy Hogan

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Supreme Court of Florida ____________ No. SC95925 ____________ FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, et al., Petitioners, vs. JIMMY HOGAN, Respondent. [February 22, 2001] QUINCE, J. We have for review a decision on the following question of great public importance certified by the First District Court of Appeal in Department of Transportation v. Hogan, 24 Fla. L. Weekly D1507 (Fla. 1st DCA June 22, 1999): WHERE AN EMPLOYER TAKES A WORKERS COMPENSATION OFFSET UNDER SECTION 440.20(15), FLORIDA STATUTES (1985), AND INITIALLY INCLUDES SUPPLEMENTAL BENEFITS PAID UNDER SECTION 440.15(1)(e)(1), FLORIDA STATUTES (1985), IS THE EMPLOYER ENTITLED TO RECALCULATE THE OFFSET BASED ON THE YEARLY 5% BENEFITS? INCREASE IN SUPPLEMENTAL We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed in City of Clearwater v. Acker, 755 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 1999), we answer the certified question in the negative and approve the First District s decision in this case. It is so ordered. WELLS, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE and LEWIS, JJ., concur. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION, AND IF FILED, DETERMINED. Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal Certified Great Public Importance First District - Case No. 1D98-3908 Nancy A Lauten of Fowler, White, Gillen, Boggs, Villareal & Banker, P.A., Tampa, Florida, for Petitioners Randall O. Reder, Tampa, Florida, and Thomas Cassidy, Lakeland, Florida, for Respondent -2-

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.