1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. So.2d
  4. 184 So.2d
  5. 184 So.2d 171 (1966)
 

CHEATHEM v. FRUIT BOWL, INC.

No. 34540.

184 So.2d 171 (1966)

Louella CHEATHEM, Petitioner, Cross-Respondent, v. The FRUIT BOWL, INC., Security Mutual Insurance Co. of New York, and the Florida Industrial Commission, Respondents, Cross-Petitioners.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 9, 1966.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Gerald Shapiro, Miami, for petitioner and cross-respondent.

Pyszka, Kessler, McMath & Adams, Miami, for The Fruit Bowl, Inc., and Security Mut. Ins. Co. of New York, respondents and cross-petitioners.

Patrick H. Mears, Tallahassee, and J. Franklin Garner, Lakeland, for Florida Industrial Commission, respondent.

THOMAS, Justice.

This is the second appearance of this controversy in this court. Our opinion in the first appeal is recorded in 155 So.2d at page 865. Following the ruling in that case, that the claim having been dismissed with allowance only for medical expenses, drugs and transportation costs, a further award was improper except on petition under F.S.A. Sec. 440.28 of Workmen's Compensation Law on the ground that there had been a mistake of fact or a change of...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases