This case concerned whether Florida’s Workers’ Compensation Law sets forth the sole standard for determining a claimant’s attorney’s fees in workers’ compensation cases, or whether courts may still use the criteria set forth in case law for determining a “reasonable attorney’s fee.” The Florida Justice Reform Institute and several other amici filed an amicus brief in which they argued that the intent was to wholly replace the discretionary “reasonable attorney’s fee” standard in order to curb the unsustainable growth in workers’ compensation litigation. The Florida Supreme Court disagreed, holding that the claimant is entitled to a “reasonable attorney’s fee” as defined in case law. In reaction to this case, the Florida Legislature amended the statute to remove any ambiguity that it was intended to replace the standard found in case law.
FJRI represented by George N. Meros, Jr. and Andy V. Bardos of GrayRobinson, P.A.