En Banc Decision Alters Rules For Workers’ Compensation Filing Deadlines

In late March, an en banc panel of the First District Court of Appeals issued a landmark ruling which essentially states that courts have been misinterpreting the state’s workers’ compensation statute since its alteration in 1999. While it remains to be seen what the ultimate outcome of this ruling will be, it will almost certainly affect future filings and appeals of benefits being denied – and, in some cases, may even result in the reopening of those already decided.

The Definition Of One Word

A statute of limitations is a law which establishes a certain time frame in which a lawsuit or claim for benefits can be filed. As written, Florida’s workers’ compensation statutes clearly state that a petition for workers’ compensation benefits is barred unless it is filed within two years of the work injury (or from the date the employee should have known of the work injury). So, if a person is injured at work and does not file a claim for benefits until 2.5 years later, their claim will not be paid – they have waited too long.

That said, the confusion in the en banc ruling stems from trying to define a single word in the relevant statute. Sec. 440.19(2) states that if any “remedial treatment” is financed or indemnity benefits are paid, the statute of limitations is tolled for one year from the date of that payment. Historically, the word ‘toll’ was interpreted as adding an extra one year onto the original two years allowed by the statute of limitations, but this is not the interpretation that the First District Court of Appeals decided to approve.

The ‘Plain Language’ Of The Statute

The chief judge on the en banc panel stated in his opinion that the majority simply looked at the plain language, or plain meaning, of the word ‘toll’ (and the interpretation this gives the statute). The ‘plain meaning’ rule is one of the cornerstones of English-style jurisprudence, and it basically means that a court will interpret a word in the plain meaning of the people the statement is designed for. For example, most attorneys would understand the word “toll” to mean “stop or suspend,” specifically in the context of statutes of limitations – thus, the court ruled that this was the correct interpretation.

What this means for the average person is that instead of having a continually running clock while a person is receiving treatment for their work injury, the statute’s timer on the period where someone can seek benefits is temporarily stopped. Using this interpretation, a person who has been told they no longer qualify for workers’ compensation benefits might still qualify. It remains to be seen how this ruling will be interpolated into Florida’s jurisprudence.

Contact An Orlando Workers’ Compensation Attorney

While the Court of Appeals’ ruling does make a major change in the way workers’ compensation claims are interpreted in Florida, all the little details are still very much up in the air. If you have questions or concerns about your workers’ compensation claim, contacting an Orlando workers’ compensation attorney from the Hornsby Law Group can help get you the answers you need. Contact our office today at (407) 499-8887 to schedule a consultation.

Source:

caselaw.findlaw.com/court/fl-district-court-of-appeal/118243178.html