Does Exposure to Mold Qualify for a Worker’s Comp Claim?
If you are injured on the job or if your workplace conditions are unhealthy and cause you to get sick, your employer has a [...]
For a free confidential consultation
(954)524-6886 Or (844) 316-7696
SE HABLA ESPAÑOL and NOU PALE KREYOL
For more than 25 years, Nick Panebianco has been helping injured workers to get the compensation they need and deserve. Over that time, he has achieved statewide recognition, and Panebianco Workers Compensation Law has become known as an aggressive advocate that their clients can trust to get results. Nick Panebianco has more appellate victories than any other active claimant attorney in South Florida. Our objectives are threefold:
Check out some of the actual results we have been able to achieve for clients below, then reach out to us to set up a free initial consultation by emailing [email protected], calling us 24/7 at (954)524-6886 or (844) 316-7679, or completing our easy online review form.
The appellate upheld an award finding that the injured workers subsequent fall down the staircase at home due to instability from the original foot injury was compensable and the injuries therefrom to his hip and low back were the responsibility of workers comp. This case was of a first impression as it interpreted the new w/c statute. Mr. Panebianco secured a favorable result for injured workers statewide by expanding on and eliminating some of the limitations and perceived reduction in responsibility to be borne by the workers' compensation insurance company for subsequent intervening accidents in this landmark decision.
Workers Compensation judges ruling that changed the terms of a stipulated settlement for an injured worker. This landmark decision held that a judge of compensation claims only has the authority to approve or reject a settlement and cannot alter or modify its terms
The appellate court upheld a favorable ruling from the Workers Compensation judge finding that the injured worker was permanently and totally disabled from his work-related shoulder injury. The court also upheld the judge’s ruling that ordered the claimant's unauthorized doctors to be authorized due to the Workers Compensation insurance company’s wrongful denial of requested specialty care. This landmark decision and one of first impression interpreted the new standards for permanent total disability which at first appeared to limit an injured workers ability to secure lifetime checks for a permanent and totally disabling injury. Injured workers statewide benefited from this decision.
For the very first time in Florida Workers Compensation history, a judge ruled that a 10-year-old case was not barred by the statute of limitation due to the insurance company’s failure to advise the injured worker of all of his pertinent rights in writing, including information about the statute of limitations. Years of previous case law did not require information about the statute of limitations to be conveyed in writing. The appellate court upheld the ruling and this landmark decision provided relief to many injured workers statewide while forcing a policy and procedure change for all insurance companies from that point on around the state which is still used to this day.
A Workers Compensation judge had awarded an orthopedist and a neurologist to an injured worker who did not suffer one identifiable accident or trauma in a heavily contested and litigated "repetitive trauma" case. A
Hollywood high school female janitor claimed injury to her low back after working for years cleaning bathrooms and classrooms at a high school. She then felt pain in her low back while vacuuming at home after an especially difficult week at work. Broward County school board was required to pay an $80,000 attorneys fee to the injured worker's attorney for wrongfully contesting and losing this claim.
The appellate court reversed a ruling by an out of area Workers Compensation judge who rejected a stipulation for insurance company paid attorney’s fees and changed the terms of a settlement. The appellate court also
eld that its improper for a Workers Compensation judge to rely only on extra-record evidence such as the docket only, without providing a hearing and forum to consider all evidence.
The appellate court reversed the ruling of an out of area Workers Compensation judge who ruled that the case had been dismissed two (2 x) times and was thus barred by res judicata. The appellate court held there were
no Dismissals. Mr. Panebianco later settled the injured worker's case for well over 6 figures and she is one of the few injured workers whose medical care continues to be provided by Workers Compensation after a settlement.