Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2008

Suluki v. American Airlines

Suluki v. American Airlines
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided May 8, 2008 · Browning, Hawkes, Lewis
981 So. 2d 1225; 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 7059; 2008 WL 1968309 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Suluki v. American Airlines

Concurring Opinion

BROWNING, C.J.,

concurring.

I write only to make known my reasons for concurring in the majority affirmance of a final order entered twenty-three months after the final hearing. It is fundamental to me that a Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) cannot adequately remember the testimony addressed at a hearing after such a long delay, and such a delay should be treated as a per se reversible error. Claimant deserves a ruling from a JCC with a “fresher” mind than one occasioned by such a delay. I concur here because Appellant failed to preserve this issue before the JCC. See Rivendell of Ft. Walton v. Petway, 833 So.2d 292, 295 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). I concur fully in the majority’s affirmance of the other issues.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LEWIS and HAWKES, JJ., CONCUR. BROWNING, C. J„ CONCURS WITH OPINION.

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