CourtCases2010

Accordingly i find that the case law cited by the

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: xpand application of the statute to the plaintiff's claim in Montes de Oca on the ground that the legislature had already provided a remedy for the plaintiff's grievance within the workers' compensation chapter, not because the statute was limited to discharge. By relying on Montes de Oca and the retaliatory discharge cases, the lower court erroneously entered summary judgment against the [**17] plaintiff. n4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n4 We express no opinion about the factual basis for the claim or the validity of the pleaded damage claim. These issues are not before us. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - REVERSED and REMANDED. SHARP, W., J., concurs. COBB, J., dissents, with opinion. Case No. 99-494 DISSENTBY: COBB DISSENT: COBB, J., dissenting. The issue in this case is whether section 440.205, Florida Statutes, creates a statutory cause of action, separate and apart from the context of a workers' compensation claim, for an individual against his employer when that individual's employment is ongoing. That section provides: No employer shall discharge, threaten to discharge, intimidate, or coerce any employee by reason of such employee's valid claim for compensation or attempt to claim compensation under the Workers' Compensation Law. 134 The trial court, in a thoughtful final order of dismissal, explained its reasoning: 1. The Plaintiff filed suit against the Defendant alleging a violation of § 440.205 [**18] Florida Statutes (1997). The Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss asserting that the lawsuit failed to state a cause of action as the Plaintiff remained employed with the Defendant. 2. A hearing on the Motion to Dismiss was held in chambers on January 8, 1999. Counsel for each party was present at the hearing and provided the court with copies of case law relied upon in support of their respective arguments. 3. The primary argument of the Defendant is that F.S. § 440.205 provides a cause of action from wrongful...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 09/30/2012 for the course ENC 102 taught by Professor Deria during the Spring '08 term at FIU.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online