Case ID: so3d_162/html/1057-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Leonardo URGUELLES, Appellant, v. EL OASIS CAFE and Technology Ins. Co., Appellees.
    No. 1D14-5333.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
    April 15, 2015.
    Mark L. Zientz of the Law Offices of Mark L. Zientz, P.A., Miami, for Appellant.
    Rayford H. Taylor of Casey Gilson, P.C., Atlanta, Ga., for Appellees.
   PER CURIAM.

In this workers’ compensation appeal, Claimant argues that the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) erred when he reduced a stipulated Claimant-paid attorney’s fee submitted for his approval to ten percent of the monetary value of past benefits secured. Section 440.34(1), Florida Statutes (2012), provides that “any attorney’s fee” approved by a JCC must equal 20% of the first $5,000 secured by the attorney, 15% of the next $5,000, and 10% of the remaining benefits secured over $10,000 (the “20/15/10 formula”). The JCC indicated that he reduced the stipulated fee amount under the 20/15/10 formula based on his interpretation that the first $10,000 in benefits secured, to which the percentages of twenty and fifteen percent would apply, had been “exhausted” with the approval of another attorney’s fee on a lump-sum settlement (which were collected by another attorney altogether). The JCC did not, however, have the benefit of our recent decision in Cortes-Martinez v. Pal metto Vegetable Co., 159 So.3d 934 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015), where this Court held that each separate and distinct attorney’s fee is subject to the 20/15/10 formula. Because the reduction here was based on an incorrect interpretation of the application of the 20/15/10 formula, we REVERSE and REMAND for entry of an order approving the stipulated Claimant-paid attorney’s fee.

WOLF, ROWE, and SWANSON, JJ., concur.