Service American Indemnity Company/PMA Insurance Group and Robert B. Hess Racing, Inc. v. Bulfrano Andres Bahena

2024-2283Fladistctapp1

Abrir fonte

Texto completo

FIRST D ISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
S TATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
No. 1D2024-2283
_____________________________
S ERVICE A MERICAN I NDEMNITY
C OMPANY /PMA I NSURANCE
GROUP and R OBERT B. H ESS
R ACING, INC .,
Appellants,
v.
B ULFRANO A NDRES B AHENA ,
Appellee.
_____________________________
On appeal from the Office of the Judges of Compensation Claims.
Michael J. Ring, Judge.
Date of Accident: July 23, 2023.
November 26, 2025
PER C URIAM.
Because 	competent, 	substantial 	evidence 	in 	the 	record
supports 	the 	Judge 	of 	Compensation 	Claims’ 	findings 	that
Appellee met the definition of employee and did not meet the
definition 	of 	independent 	contractor, 	the 	amended 	final
compensation order is affirmed. 	See § 440.02(18)(a), Fla. Stat.
(2023) (defining employee under Workers’ Compensation Law);
§ 440.02(18)(d)1. (defining independent contractor).
OSTERHAUS, C.J., and ROBERTS and B ILBREY , JJ., concur.
2
_____________________________
Not 	final 	until 	disposition 	of 	any 	timely 	and
authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
9.331.
_____________________________
Jodi K. Middleton of Zimmerman, Kiser & Sutcliffe, P.A., Orlando;
Richard N. Asfar of Almazan Law, Tampa; K. Kay Dodd Anderson,
and Rene E. Hidalgo of Almazan Law, Miami, for Appellants.
Michael J. Winer of Winer Law Group, Tampa; Richard James
Dolan, II, Fort Lauderdale, for Appellee.

OCR transcription; preserved printed pages are authoritative

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA

No. 1D2024-2283

SERVICE AMERICAN INDEMNITY
COMPANY/PMA INSURANCE
GROUP and ROBERT B. HESS
RACING, INC.,

Appellants,

Vv.

BULFRANO ANDRES BAHENA,

Appellee.

On appeal from the Office of the Judges of Compensation Claims.
Michael J. Ring, Judge.

Date of Accident: July 23, 2028.
November 26, 2025
PER CURIAM.

Because competent, substantial evidence in the record
supports the Judge of Compensation Claims’ findings that
Appellee met the definition of employee and did not meet the
definition of independent contractor, the amended final
compensation order is affirmed. See § 440.02(18)(a), Fla. Stat.
(2023) (defining employee under Workers’ Compensation Law);
§ 440.02(18)(d)1. (defining independent contractor).

OSTERHAUS, C.J., and ROBERTS and BILBREY, JJ., concur.

Not final until disposition of any timely and
authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
9.331.

Jodi K. Middleton of Zimmerman, Kiser & Sutcliffe, P.A., Orlando;
Richard N. Asfar of Almazan Law, Tampa; K. Kay Dodd Anderson,
and Rene E. Hidalgo of Almazan Law, Miami, for Appellants.

Michael J. Winer of Winer Law Group, Tampa; Richard James
Dolan, II, Fort Lauderdale, for Appellee.

Continue sua pesquisa no ChatGPT ou Claude

Conecte o Omnilex para pesquisar o corpus jurídico pelo seu assistente de IA.