Proposal (Montserrat Font) FINAL
-
Upload
eduardo-neret -
Category
Documents
-
view
343 -
download
0
Transcript of Proposal (Montserrat Font) FINAL
1 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. ATTORNEYS AND LEGAL STAFF; EXPERIENCE WITH WORKERS’
COMPENSATION LAW; and REPRESENTATIVE PRIVATE AND PUBLIC
CLIENTS ….......................................................................................................................1
B. INDIVIDUAL/FIRM AND ORGANIZATION ....................................................... 5
C. LEGAL SERVICES .................................................................................................... 6
D. OTHER QUALIFICATIONS OR EXPERIENCE ................................................... 7
E. REQUIRED INSURANCE.......................................................................................... 8
F. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY AND M/WBE PARTICIPATION .. 8
Equal Employment Opportunity………………………………………………………..8
Small/Micro Business Enterprise and Minority/Women Business Enterprise (M/WBE)
Participation .................................................................................................................... 8
EXHIBIT “1” EDUARDO E. NERET Resume ............................................................ 9
EXHIBIT “2”JAVIER A. FINLAY Resume ................................................................ 11
EXHIBIT “3” T. PETER NGUYEN Resume............................................................... 13
EXHIBIT “4”APPEALS & CASE HIGHLIGHTS…..…...………...………………..15
2 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
A. ATTORNEYS AND LEGAL STAFF; EXPERIENCE WITH
WORKERS’COMPENSATION and GENERAL LIABILITY MATTERS;
and REPRESENTATIVE PRIVATE AND PUBLIC CLIENTS.
Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP, specializes in defending employers, carriers and
servicing agents in Workers’ Compensation matters. The Workers’ Compensation cases
will be handled by Eduardo E. Neret, Esq., Javier A. Finlay, Esq. and T. Peter Nguyen,
Esq.
Eduardo E. Neret, Esq.
Eduardo E. Neret graduated from the University of Florida in 1989 with a Bachelor
Degree in Business Administration. Before attending law school, Mr. Neret worked in the
United States House of Representatives in Washington D.C., as an Assistant Press
Secretary for the Honorable Congressman, Andy Ireland. Mr. Neret then attended Florida
State University College of Law and graduated with Honors in 1992. While attending Law
School, Mr. Neret clerked at the Florida Supreme Court for the Honorable Parker Lee
McDonald. Upon graduation from law school, attorney Neret clerked for the Honorable
James R. Jorgenson at the Third District Court of Appeal. After the one year commitment
to clerk at the Third District Court of Appeal, attorney Neret began his practice of law in
the private sector in October 1993. Mr. Neret was a shareholder at Akerman Senterfitt,
P.A., and he ran the workers’ compensation department while working for such firm. In
2001, Mr. Neret opened up his own practice.
Since October 1993, attorney Neret has concentrated his practice on defending
employers, servicing agents and carriers in workers’ compensation matters. Mr. Neret has
over 22 years practicing law in the area of Workers’ Compensation and has tried numerous
cases before all of the Judges of Compensation Claims in the Miami, Fort Lauderdale, and
West Palm Beach Districts of the Division of Administrative Hearings. Mr. Neret has
lectured to various professional organizations as well as insurance groups in the areas of
workers' compensation and wrongful termination. Specifically, Mr. Neret has lectured for
Lorman Education Services as well as for the National Business Institute. He has also
lectured in the area of employers' rights to reimbursement from the Special Disability Trust
Fund. He is presently a member of the Workers' Compensation Section of the Florida Bar.
Mr. Neret’s office is centrally located at 2100 Coral Way, Suite 400, Miami, Florida 33145.
See Mr. Neret’s Résumé, attached hereto as Exhibit “1.”
Javier A. Finlay, Esq.
Javier A. Finlay is a partner with the firm. Javier graduated Cum Laude from the
Thomas M. Cooley Law School located in Lansing, Michigan in 2007. Subsequently,
Javier went to work for Robert T. Eglet, Esq., of Eglet Wall, named the National Lawyer
of the year in 2010 and Trial Lawyer of the Year in 2005 and 2012; the latter achievement
was in large part due to securing a $505 million dollar jury verdict award in Las Vegas,
Nevada. Thereafter, Mr. Finlay returned to Miami-Dade County and clerked for Hector J.
Lombana at the law firm of Gamba and Lombana where he was involved in all aspects of
3 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
this boutique law firm’s well known civil litigation practice. Mr. Finlay has litigated a
variety of cases involving auto accidents, medical malpractice, unsafe land/property,
insurance coverage disputes, workers’ compensation and slip and fall accidents. This
opportunity to prosecute such cases provided invaluable experience and insight regarding
how injured individuals review and evaluate their cases. For the past five years, Mr. Finlay
has concentrated his practice on Workers’ Compensation and General Liability defense
matters under the tutelage of Mr. Eduardo E. Neret. Mr. Finlay is a member of both the
Florida Bar and the Nevada Bar. He is also admitted to practice in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Florida and his professional affiliations include the
American Bar Association, Cuban American Bar Association and Miami Dade County Bar
Association. See Mr. Finlay’s Résumé, attached hereto as Exhibit “2.”
T. Peter Nguyen, Esq.
T. Peter Nguyen is a partner with the firm. He completed his undergraduate
education at the University of California at Irvine and received a Bachelor of Arts in
1993. Thereafter, he went on to serve the public as a police officer in the City of Orange,
California where his fluency in English, Vietnamese and Spanish proved invaluable to the
community.
Mr. Nguyen then attended the University Of Pittsburgh School Of Law where he
earned his Juris Doctor Degree in 1998. Upon graduation, he worked as judicial law clerk
for Judge Martin Kahn, Circuit Court Judge for the 11th Judicial Circuit (Special Division)
and former Chairman of the Florida Continuing Education Committee. Mr. Nguyen’s
responsibilities as a judicial law clerk included performing complex legal research and
composing memoranda of law as well as participating in caucuses with other senior judges
on diverse issues of law and procedure.
Mr. Nguyen has over 15 years of experience of defending Employers, Carriers and
Self-Insured in Workers’ Compensation claims. He has developed a particular adeptness
in the handling of self-insured and special accounts including representation of high
retention clients, self-insured hospitals and municipalities and the defense of wrap-up
policy claims. Moreover, Mr. Nguyen authored “Limitations on Workers’ Compensation
Immunity” and “Major Contributing Cause: Is It a Substantive Change or a Repackaging
of an Old Concept?”, published in The Bulletin (Dade County Bar Association Newspaper)
and has taught and continues to provide CEU courses his clients. See Mr. Nguyen’s
Résumé, attached hereto as Exhibit “3.”
4 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
Relevant Experience with Private/Public entities including Educational
Institutions and Municipalities.
The firm currently represents the following clients: United States Sugar Corp.;
Areas USA, Inc.; Burger King, Corp., Miami-Dade County School Board; the University
of Miami; The City of Hialeah; The City of Miami Beach: Tenet Health Care; Florida
Detroit Diesel; The City of Coral Gables; The City of Key West, The State of Florida; and
Barry University in workers’ compensation and/or General Liability matters. In the many
years of representing the foregoing entities, we have experience in dealing with in-house
counsel, City Attorneys, and Assistant City Attorneys along with their contracted third
party administrators and employer-designated workers’ compensation claims specialists
and understand how to streamline information to aid in decision making. The following is
a list of references for the above-referenced current clients:
Name/Address Institution Reference/Phone Number University of Miami Andrea Orange, Risk Manager/Exec. Dir.
1320 South Dixie Highway (305) 284-3163
Suite 1200, Coral Gables, FL 33146
Areas USA, Inc. Kirk D. Weiss
5301 Blue Lagoon Drive (305) 267-8510
Suite 690, Miami, Florida 33126
United States Sugar Corp. Edward Almeida, Esq.
111 Ponce de Leon Ave. (863) 902-2419
Clewiston, Florida 33440
City of Hialeah Robert Lloyd-Still, Risk Manager
Hialeah, FL 33010 (305) 883-8059
Miami Dade County School Board Naomi Kuker
(305) 995-7161
Enclosed, you will find a list of Case Highlights for significant matters handled on
behalf of the above-referenced clients and other high profile clients, attached hereto as
Exhibit “3.”
5 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
B. INDIVIDUAL/FIRM AND ORGANIZATION
Eduardo E. Neret, Esq., is the Managing Partner for the firm. His contact
information is as follows:
2100 Coral Way, Suite 400, Miami, FL 33145
Phone: (305) 423-3820
Fax: (305) 423-3821
Email: [email protected]
Mr. Neret, Mr. Finlay and Mr. Nguyen are accessible to the client on a daily basis.
Should the client need immediate attention, either attorney will be available. Should an
attorney not be available, an attorney will contact the client within the same business day
to address any concerns the client may have. In addition, the Firm’s central location makes
it feasible to travel to any meetings called for by the client in short notice. Lastly, the
firm’s paralegals will also be available to the client should a matter arise where an attorney
is not immediately available; nevertheless, an attorney will contact the client within the
same business day to address its concerns.
Mr. Neret has practiced Workers’ Compensation law for over 23 years beginning
with his time at Akerman Senterfitt, P.A. In addition, Mr. Neret has been charged with
handling over 16 reported appellate cases regarding workers’ compensation matters. Most
recently, Mr. Neret was successful in defending a claim involving the “going and coming
rule”; specifically, the compensability of an accident when an employee/claimant is
provided with company transportation. The law on this subject matter is thin at best. Mr.
Neret not only secured a judgment in the lower administrative tribunal on behalf of the
Employer/Carrier but also was successful in defending same when arguing the matter in
the First District Court of Appeals.
Javier A. Finlay, Esq., has concentrated his practice on civil litigation for the past
eight years; five of which have been primarily workers’ compensation and general liability
matters. Mr. Finlay has also been involved in the appellate practice of workers’
compensation cases by way of drafting Initial Briefs, Answer Briefs, and Reply Briefs. Mr.
Finlay has been successful in defending workers’ compensation cases on behalf of
Employers/Carriers/Servicing Agents and taking same to trial before the Judge of
Compensation Claims.
T. Peter Nguyen, Esq., has over 15 years of experience representing carriers and
large self-insured including but not limited to the City of Miami Beach, Tenet Healthcare
and Florida Power and Light. Mr. Nguyen has authored articles and taught seminars on
workers’ compensation issues surrounding immunity, tort liability, Heart and Lung Bill
litigation and evidentiary standards for permanent total disability benefits.
6 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
C. LEGAL SERVICES
At Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, we are committed to providing our clients with the
highest level of legal services with superior results in a cost effective manner. Our goal is
to ensure that each client receives individualized quality legal representation. We take
pride that all cases are handled by experienced attorneys who will aggressively defend
cases in which there is no liability, and who will work toward the early settlement of cases
where there is liability and exposure.
The attorneys’ role is to be involved in all facets of litigation, and pre-litigation
matters should said services be requested, including but not limited to:
Formulating case strategy
Conducting research
Engaging in effective motion practice
Developing a formidable discovery strategy including responding to discovery
requests
Attending hearings, trials, mediations and depositions
Negotiating settlement and washout settlements with opposing counsel
Pursuing workers’ compensation appellate practice including drafting Initial
Appellate Briefs, Answer Briefs and Reply Briefs and participating in Oral
Argument
When a new case is referred to the office, a paralegal is assigned to the file. Each
client will have the same paralegal assigned to them for all cases to create an efficient and
comfortable working environment. Therefore, assuming Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP, is
selected to represent the client, the client will have the same attorney and paralegal assigned
to all of its files. This will create a systematic approach whereby the claims handler,
attorney and paralegal will be familiar with each other resulting in a more efficient working
environment.
7 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
D. OTHER QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE
a. Collateral Matters. In addition to having practiced workers’ compensation
defense for twenty years before Judges of Compensation Claims, the firm has experience
in handling other collateral workers’ compensation matters such as litigating workers’
compensation liens and wrongful termination claims in Circuit Court. Furthermore, the
firm has particular experience litigating repetitive trauma and chemical exposure cases.
b. Appeals: Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP is also experienced in handling
workers’ compensation appeals at all appellate levels. This part of our practice adds much
value for our clients by creating a true full service workers’ compensation practice. Prior
to the filing of an appeal, the Firm expediently evaluates the viability of undertaking an
appeal including the construction of an appellate budget and timeline of events to so that
our clients can make an informed decision on whether to pursue an appeal.
c. Minority Business Enterprise: Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP, meets the
definition of Minority Business Enterprise under Rule 6Gx13-3G-1.01. The Firm is 100%
owned and controlled by members who are of Hispanic descent. Mr. Neret was born and
raised in Nicaragua, Central America. In addition, Mr. Finlay is a Cuban American native
of Miami, Florida and Mr. Nguyen is a Vietnamese American who immigrated to the
United States at age 4. Prior to the merger, the Law Offices of Eduardo E. Neret, P.A. was
certified as a Minority owned Business Enterprise and the new entity is currently seeking
such designation.
d. Case Highlights: Why take our word for it? Take a look at our Case
Highlights included in our composite Exhibit “2”. In addition, as part of the Exhibit, you
will find a list of our open and closed files representing a comprehensive client list, and
matters handled by our firm. Moreover, we have included therein a list of appeals to show
the client that we zealously advocate for our clients from the beginning to the end.
8 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
E. REQUIRED INSURANCE
Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP, has the required coverage for Workers’
Compensation, Commercial General Liability and Professional Liability. Upon a request,
proof will be provided.
F. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY AND M/WBE
PARTICIPATION
Equal Employment Opportunity: Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP, provides equal
employment opportunities (EEO) to all employees and applicants for employment without
regard to race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression,
national origin, age, disability, genetic information, marital status, amnesty, or status as a
covered veteran in accordance with applicable federal, state and local laws. The Firm
complies with applicable state and local laws governing non-discrimination in employment
in every location in which the company has facilities. This policy applies to all terms and
conditions of employment, including, but not limited to, hiring, placement, promotion,
termination, layoff, recall, transfer, leaves of absence, compensation, and training.
Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP, expressly prohibits any form of unlawful employee
harassment based on race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or
expression, national origin, age, genetic information, disability, or veteran status. Improper
interference with the ability of the Firm’s employees to perform their expected job duties
is absolutely not tolerated.
9 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
EXHIBIT “1”
EDUARDO E. NERET 2100 CORAL WAY
SUITE 400
MIAMI, FL 33145
TELEPHONE: (305) 423-3820
FACSIMILE:(305) 423-3821
EMAIL: [email protected]
Eduardo E. Neret has over 20 years of experience specializing
in various areas of litigation, including state and federal workers’ compensation,
negligence, unemployment compensation, toxic tort, wrongful termination, and premises
liability.
Mr. Neret has concentrated his practice in the area of Workers’ Compensation since 1993
and has practiced and tried cases before most of the Judges of Compensation Claims in the
Miami, Fort Lauderdale, and West Palm Beach Districts of the Division of Administrative
Hearings. Mr. Neret has lectured in the areas of workers’ compensation and wrongful
termination. He has also lectured in the area of employers’ rights to reimbursement from
the Special Disability Trust Fund. He is presently a member of the Workers’ Compensation
Section of the Florida Bar.
Representative Clients
Areas USA, Inc. City of Coral Gables
Barry University City of Hialeah
Burger King Corporation Florida Detroit Diesel
City of Key West City of North Miami
La Petite Academy Live Nation
U.S. Sugar Corporation University of Miami
State of Florida
10 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
Prior Legal Experience
Law Clerk, Honorable Parker Lee McDonald, Supreme Court of Florida 1990
Law Clerk, Honorable James R. Jorgenson, Third District Court of Appeal, 1992-1993
Associate Akerman Senterfitt & Eidson, P.A. 1994-1999
Shareholder Akerman Senterfitt & Eidson, P.A. 2000-2001
Lectures
"Workers' Compensation in Florida," Lorman Education Services, June 2001
"Workers' Compensation in Florida," National Business Institute, December 2000
"ADA, FMLA and Workers' Compensation in Florida," Lorman Education Services,
January & November, 2000
Education
1992 – J.D., Florida State University (with Honors)
1989 – B.S.B.A., University of Florida
11 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
EXHIBIT “2”
JAVIER A. FINLAY 2100 CORAL WAY
SUITE 400
MIAMI, FL 33145
TELEPHONE: (305) 423-3820
FACSIMILE:(305) 423-3821
EMAIL: [email protected]
Javier A. Finlay is a litigator with extensive experience in
defending cases involving claims of premises liability, automobile liability, and workers’
compensation. His many years of practice include representation of national and
international corporations, as well as local businesses. He has lectured on trending topics
regarding workers compensation matters, and he currently acts as an advisor to his
corporate clients while engaging in contractual negotiations with vendors including, but
not limited to, indemnification and defense provisions.
Mr. Finlay is a member of the State Bar in both the State of Florida and the State of Nevada,
and he is admitted to practice in the United States District Court for the Southern District
of Florida. Additionally, Mr. Finlay’s professional affiliations include the American Bar
Association, Cuban American Bar Association, and the Dade County Bar Association.
Representative Clients
American Tower Corp. Ideal Supply, Inc.
Areas USA, Inc. Miami Dade County Public Schools
Countach Corp. Vitas Healthcare
Grow With Us Academy
Practice Areas
Automobile Liability Insurance Defense
General Liability Workers’ Compensation
12 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
Admissions
Florida, Nevada and United States District Court, Southern District of Florida
Associations
American Bar Association, Cuban American Bar Association and Dade County Bar
Association
Lectures
“Update on Workers’ Compensation Medical Benefits,” September 2015, Sedgwick
Presentation.
“Major Contributing Cause, Update on Case Law,” June 2015, University of Miami
Education
2007 - Thomas M. Cooley Law School, Juris Doctor, cum laude,
2003 - Florida International University; Bachelor of Business Administration
13 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
EXHIBIT “3”
T. PETER NGUYEN 2100 CORAL WAY
SUITE 400
MIAMI, FL 33145
TELEPHONE: (305) 423-3820
FACSIMILE: (305) 423-3821
EMAIL: [email protected]
T. Peter Nguyen specializes in the defense of carriers and self-insureds in workers’
compensation matter. He also practices in the area of “Heart and Lung Bill” cases
associated with hypertension and cardiac claims filed by First Responders. Mr. Nguyen
was a police officer prior to attending law school and has unique insight to these type of
cases.
Mr. Nguyen has practiced exclusively in the area of workers' compensation since 1999. He
has tried numerous cases before the Judges of Compensation Claims in the Miami, Fort
Lauderdale, Tampa, Jacksonville and West Palm Beach Districts of the Division of
Administrative Hearings. Mr. Nguyen has lectured on topics including but not limited to
workers’ compensation denials impact on tort remedies and has written articles on the
subject of workers’ compensation for the legal community.
Representative Clients
ACE, ESIS Florida Power and Light
City of Miami Beach York Risk Services
Palmetto General Hospital Hialeah Hospital
Coral Gables Hospital North Shore Hospital
Florida Medical Center Delray Medical Center
Travelers/St. Paul Tenet Health
14 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
Prior Legal Experience
Law clerk, Judge Martin Kahn, Circuit Court Judge for the 11th Judicial Circuit (Special
Division) and former Chairman of the Florida Continuing Education Committee, 1998-
1999
Associate, Marcos, Rothman, et. al., 1999-2006
Partner, Marcos Rothman, et. al., 2006-May 2014
Partner of, NERET, FINLAY & NGUYEN, LLP, August 2015 to present
Lectures
"“Limitations on Workers’ Compensation Immunity” , December 1999, The
Bulletin(Dade County Bar Association)
“Major Contributing Cause: Is It a Substantive Change or a Repackaging of an Old
Concept?”, May 2000, The Bulletin
“Workers’ Compensation Immunity and Denial of Claims”, CEU course 2013
Education
1998 – J.D., University of Pittsburgh School of Law
1993 – B.A., University of California, Irvine
15 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
Exhibit “4”
I. APPEALS
1. Burroughs v. U.S. Sugar Corp., 2013 WL 627116 (Fla. 1st DCA February 20, 2013):
Successfully represented the Employer/Servicing Agent in a workers’ compensation
claim wherein employee claimed that accident while traveling to work in a company
vehicle was compensable. The Employer/Servicing Agent defended the claim on the
basis that the Going and Coming Rule applied. The ultimate question was whether the
employee was assigned a company vehicle for his “exclusive personal use.” The Judge
of Compensation Claims denied the accident as compensable, and the First District
Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of the JCC.
2. Avery v. City of Coral Gables, 100 So. 3d 749 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012): Represented the
Employer/Servicing Agent in a workers’ compensation proceeding to de-authorize a
psychiatrist and a psychotherapist who treated the claimant on a weekly basis for nine
years without the claimant making any progress. The Employer/Servicing Agent was
successful at trial in de-authorizing the physicians, but on appeal the First District Court
of Appeal reversed holding that because the claimant had reached maximum medical
improvement (MMI) and had been accepted as permanently and totally disabled (PTD),
by definition claimant could not make appropriate progress in recuperation because
MMI implies that no further curative treatment is necessary.
3. City of Hialeah v. Burke, 90 So. 3d 275 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012): Case involved protracted
litigation involving several Final Hearings where claimant had been denied Permanent
Total Disability Benefits and Temporary Total Disability Benefits after the expiration
of 104 weeks of temporary indemnity benefits. Claimant moved for Modification of
Final Order which had denied Permanent Total Disability Benefits, and the Judge of
Compensation Claims modified the Final Order and awarded PTD benefits. The
Employer/Servicing Agent appealed the Final Order awarding PTD an argued that there
was no change in medical circumstances justifying a modification of the previous
denial of PTD. The First District Court of Appeal affirmed without a published
decision.
4. Gonzalez v. University of Miami, 46 So. 3d 1193 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010): This case
involved the interpretation of the major contributing cause. The Employer/Servicing
Agent successfully argued before the Judge of Compensation Claims that the accident
was not the major contributing cause of the diagnosis and need for treatment. The
claimant had previously been involved in a work related accident requiring over nine
16 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
years of chiropractic treatment. The claimant appealed the case, and while the case
was on a appeal, the First District Court of Appeal issued an opinion that the major
contributing cause does not apply when the pre-existing condition is due to an industrial
accident. This prompted the Employer/Servicing Agent to file Notice of Concession
of Error.
5. Clark v. University of Miami, 46 So. 3d 49 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010): The
Employer/Servicing Agent successfully defended a claim for authorization of knee
surgery using the opinion of an EMA. The claimant appealed, and the First District
Court of Appeal affirmed the opinion of the Judge of Compensation Claims denying
the request for the surgery.
6. Valdes v. Barry University, 46 So. 3d 1050 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010): Case involved
multiple appeals after Employer/Servicing Agent moved to compel enforcement of
settlement agreement, and the Judge of Compensation Claims entered an Order
certifying the matter to circuit court for contempt purposes. Claimant appealed and the
First District Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.
7. Florida Detroit Diesel v. Nathai, 28 So. 3d 182 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010): The claimant was
awarded a second opinion by the Judge of Compensation Claims even though the
treating orthopedist opined that it was not orthopedically medically necessary to have
a second opinion. The Employer/Servicing Agent appealed, and the First District Court
of Appeal held this was a matter of competent substantial evidence for the JCC.
8. Department of Children & Families v. Burroughs, 22 So. 3d 541 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009):
The Judge of Compensation Claims awarded medical treatment to the claimant
specifically, an MRI, Flector patches, and an evaluation with a neurosurgeon. The
Employer/Servicing Agent appealed arguing that there was no competent substantial
evidence to support the award of such benefits, and the First District Court of Appeal
affirmed the Judge of Compensation Claims.
9. Amesquita v. U.S. Sugar Corp., 993 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008): The claimant
sustained a compensable accident and was able to return to work light duty. The
claimant alleged he was not capable of performing his light duty occupation, and the
Employer/Servicing Agent denied Temporary Partial Disability Benefits. The Judge of
Compensation Claims agreed with the Employer/Servicing Agent and denied TPD
benefits. The claimant appealed, and the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the
denial of Temporary Partial Disability Benefits.
17 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
10. Cartaya v. Coastline Distribution, 937 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006): Successfully
defended the Employer/Servicing Agent in a claim involving post lump sum settlement
of the case. The claimant wanted payment of additional medical bills, and the
Employer/Servicing Agent argued that the settlement was clear and unambiguous. The
First District Court of Appeal held that the claimant was not entitled to payment of
medical bills per the agreement of the parties
11. U.S. Sugar Corp. v. Henson, 787 So. 2d 3 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), approved, 823 So. 2d
104 (Fla. 2002): Claimant was agricultural worker who claimed that he had been
exposed to pesticides and herbicides while working for the Employer. At trial, the
Employer/Servicing Agent challenged the admissibility of the opinions of the experts.
The Judge of Compensation Claims allowed the expert testimony and ruled in favor of
the claimant finding that there was an exposure. The Employer/Servicing Agent
appealed. The District Court of Appeal, affirmed and certified a question to the Florida
Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, held that, as a matter of first impression, the Frye
general acceptance standard for admissibility of novel scientific evidence applied to
workers' compensation cases.
12. Jauma v. City of Hialeah, 758 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000): Resident of street onto
which city contractor had pumped muddy water from excavation brought personal
injury action against City after he slipped and fell from curb. The Circuit Court Judge
granted summary judgment to the City. Resident appealed. The District Court of
Appeal held that there was a question of fact as to whether the City could be liable for
failing to maintain its sidewalks in a reasonably safe condition and that open and
obvious nature of the hazard did not relieve City of liability.
13. Betancourt v. Sears Roebuck & Co., 693 So. 2d 680 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997): Workers'
compensation claimant appealed from order of the Judge of Compensation Claims.,
which denied in part and granted in part her claim for temporary partial disability (TPD)
benefits. The District Court of Appeal held that: (1) Court had jurisdiction to consider
claimant's appeal despite absence of ruling with regard to portion of claim which was
ripe for adjudication and fully tried; (2) JCC's failure to sufficiently explain its denial
of portion of claim necessitated remand for clarification or reconsideration of evidence;
and (3) JCC's failure to rule on portion of claim constituted reversible error
necessitating remand for entry of ruling.
18 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
II. CASE HIGHLIGHTS
The following is a list of significant cases the firm has litigated over the last few
years:
Rodger Burroughs v. United States Sugar Corporation
This claimant was involved in a motor vehicle accident on his way to work from
his home. The claimant was provided with a company vehicle. The claimant was allowed
to use the company vehicle to commute to and from work. This commute was considered
personal use. Per the company policy and testimony of all witnesses, the claimant was
allowed to use the company vehicle for additional personal use with permission from his
supervisor. The Employer/Servicing Agent took the position that the accident was not
compensable under the Going and Coming Rule. This rule provides that accidents while
traveling to and from work are not work related even if the employer provides
transportation as long as the transportation is provided for the “exclusive personal use” of
the employee. Neither Chapter 440 or case law defines what constitutes “exclusive
personal use.” The Employer/Servicing Agent argued successfully before the trial and
appellate courts that the claimant had exclusive personal use and the accident was not
compensable.
Ernestine Williams v. State of Florida
The claimant, a 58 year old former employee of the State of Florida, filed a claim
for Permanent Total Disability Benefits. The accident was accepted as compensable, and
the only issue was whether the claimant was capable of performing at least sedentary
employment within a 50 mile radius of her home. Through aggressive vocational re-
employment, the Employer/Carrier was able to prove to the Judge of Compensation Claims
that the claimant had a substantial earning capacity. The Judge of Compensation Claims
denied the claim for PTD.
Mirta Groseclose v. Aptimum Oncology
The claimant sustained a compensable accident requiring several surgeries to her
shoulder and ultimately requiring a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. The claimant
exhausted her 104 weeks of temporary indemnity benefits, and the issue was the proper
standard to determine Permanent Total Disability Benefits in the absence of reaching
maximum medical improvement but after the expiration of the maximum 104 weeks of
temporary indemnity benefits. The Judge of Compensation Claims agreed with the
arguments of the Employer/Servicing Agent that the test to determine PTD was whether
upon reaching MMI, the claimant would be capable of performing at least sedentary
19 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
employment. The Judge of Compensation Claims denied the claim for Permanent Total
Disability Benefits.
William Burke v. City of Hialeah
This case involved a Firefighter with a claim for Permanent Total Disability
Benefits due to uncontrollable hypertension. The Employer/Servicing Agent argued that
the claimant had a duty to mitigate his damages including exhausting all available medical
care. The Judge of Compensation Claims agreed with the Employer/Servicing Agent and
denied the claim for Permanent Total Disability Benefits. Claimant then moved for
Modification based upon a change of conditions, and the case was ultimately decided on
appeal.
Adelfa Morales v. University of Miami
The claimant filed an exposure claim against the University of Miami alleging that
her job as a Laboratory Technician was the cause of her allergic rhinitis. Claimant had
worked for several years with as a Lab Technician handling rats. She developed allergic
rhinitis. After extensive discovery, the Employer and Servicing Agent were able to prove
that her job as a Laboratory Technician did not cause the allergic rhinitis.
Donald Gaddy v. United States Sugar Corporation
Successfully defended a Permanent Total Disability Claim filed by an Equipment
Operator who sustained and injury to his right knee. Claimant was arguing that based on
his physical restrictions, educational level and transferrable skills, he was permanently and
totally disabled. The Employer/Servicing Agent successfully argued to the Judge that the
employer had a job available for the claimant and that there were other jobs the claimant
was capable of performing.
Marva Clark v. University of Miami
This claimant has brought several claims against the employer. The first claim
resulting in a Final Hearing was a request for authorization of surgery recommended by
the authorized treating provider. The Employer/Servicing Agent successfully argued to
the Judge of Compensation Claims that the surgery was not medically necessary nor
indicated by the medical evidence. The claimant appealed the Final Order denying the
surgery, and the case is now before the First District Court of Appeal.
The second claim which resulted in a separate Final Hearing was a claim for
Permanent Total Disability Benefits. The Employer/Servicing Agent through the
testimony of a vocational rehabilitation expert was able to prove that the claimant was
voluntarily limiting her income because the claimant had a substantial earning capacity.
20 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
There were a significant number of sedentary and light duty jobs the claimant could
perform within her limitations.
James Smith v. University of Miami
Successfully defended the University of Miami in a workers’ compensation claim
by a 54 year old police officer seeking Permanent Total Disability Benefits. The claimant
was involved in an accident in 1994. He subsequently applied for social security disability
and was accepted as disabled by the Social Security Administration. The Judge of
Compensation Claims found that the University of Miami conclusively proved that the
claimant had a substantial earning capacity, and thus denied the claimant Permanent Total
Disability Benefits. The case establishes that the determinations of the Social Security
Administration are not binding on the Judge of Compensation Claims.
Abraham Fernandez v. University of Miami
Obtained ruling from Judge of Compensation Claims that diagnostic tests were not
reasonable or medically necessary. Claimant sustained compensable accident and sought
medical treatment. The authorized medical provider recommended diagnostic tests which
the University of Miami and its third party servicing agent denied as not being medically
necessary. The case was litigated and proceeded to final hearing. Judge of Compensation
Claims denied the diagnostic tests and ruled in favor of the University of Miami.
Jacqueline Taojours v. University of Miami
Successfully defended the University of Miami in claim by employee who was
walking down the stairwell when she felt a pop in her knee. The claimant was seeking
compensability of the accident and authorization for orthopedic physician. The
Employer/Servicing Agent denied the compensability of the accident on the basis that the
claimant failed to timely report the accident within thirty days after the accident as
mandated by Fla. Stat. 440.185(1). The Employer/Servicing Agent also denied the claim
arguing that the employee suffered from an idiopathic condition and that the injury did not
arise out of employment. Judge of Compensation Claims ruled in favor of the University
of Miami.
Ileana Valdes v. Barry University
Successfully moved to enforce settlement agreement. Parties entered settlement
agreement at private mediation. After mediation, claimant refused to execute settlement
agreement. Barry University moved to enforce the settlement agreement. After a hearing,
the Judge of Compensation Claims entered order enforcing agreement. Claimant moved
for rehearing and Judge of Compensation Claims denied request for rehearing. Claimant
appealed and the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the Order. The Employer/Carrier
21 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
then moved to Certify the Matter to Circuit Court for Enforcement, and the claimant
appealed again. The First District Court dismissed the claimant’s appeal.
City of Hialeah
Represented the City of Hialeah in multiple workers' compensation claims
involving repetitive trauma cases. The claimants were alleging that due to repetitive
motion at work they developed either carpal tunnel syndrome, tenosynovitis, tennis elbow,
or ulnar neuropathy.
The Firm currently represents the City of Hialeah to evaluate multiple claimants
receiving Permanent Total Disability Benefits as well as Social Security Disability Benefits
to determine appropriate offsets.
Vicky Kellogg v. City of Hialeah
Successfully defended City of Hialeah against claim by former employee alleging
carpal tunnel syndrome as a result of repetitive trauma. Case was heavily litigated with
multiple expert witnesses. Judge of Compensation Claims found that the claimant’s carpal
tunnel was not related to her accident
Robert Ward v. City of Coral Gables
Successfully defended a claim for Permanent Total Disability benefits. Claimant
suffered a compensable back injury. After receiving extensive medical treatment, the
claimant filed a claim for Permanent Total Disability benefits. The City of Coral Gables
was able to prove through extensive vocational testimony that the claimant voluntarily
limited his income and that he had a substantial earning capacity.
Silva v. Hialeah Hosptial
A claim for cervical injury was denied. However, medical evidence suggested
possible repetitive trauma and exposure could have reached seven figures as the Claimant
was a high wage earner in the medical field. As Claimant’s settlement expectations were
unreasonable, trial was deemed necessary and defense prevailed at the trial and appellate
levels. Therefore, it amounted to a defense verdict.
Lopez v. Coral Gables Hospital
Elderly Claimant (medical doctor in Cuba) who worked for the hospital as a
technician in the morgue. Claimant sustained injury to his head and neck while in the
course and scope of employment. Based on his advanced age and severity of injury,
22 Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP.
Claimant was a viable candidate for permanent total disability benefits and due to prompt
and thorough discovery, case settlement for $30,000.00 which a fraction of full exposure.
Streib v. City of Miami Beach
Claimant was an elderly person who was accepted as permanently and totally
disabled. Claimant filed a claim for permanent total disability benefits to go beyond the
age 75 limit. Defense won as a matter of law and later appeal, the First District Court of
Appeals declined to entertain Claimant’s Constitutional Challenge based on Age
Discrimination.