Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2004

Flowers v. Acousti Engineering Co. of Florida

Flowers v. Acousti Engineering Co. of Florida
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided December 10, 2004 · Browning, Lewis, Polston
888 So. 2d 735; 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 18844; 2004 WL 2870001 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)
Flowers v. Acousti Engineering Co. of Florida

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Reviewing de novo the interpretation of section 440.14(l)(a) & (l)(d), Florida Statutes (1987), which is a question of law, see BellSouth Telecomm, Inc. v. Meeks, 868 So.2d 287, 289 (Fla. 2003), we conclude that the Judge of Compensation Claims correctly construed the statute in using Appellant/Claimant’s average weekly wage “at the time of the injury,” — i.e., the date of his 1988 industrial accident rather than the 2001 date when he was determined to be permanently, totally disabled — as the proper basis for computing compensation. See James v. Armstrong World Indus., Inc., 864 So.2d 1132 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); Karnes v. City of Boca Raton, 858 So.2d 1264 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003).

AFFIRMED.

BROWNING, LEWIS and POLSTON, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.