I was provided an Overview of 2018 Florida First DCA Cases, which was presented recently. The statistics about the Florida First District Court were interesting to me and might be to others.
In 2018, the Florida First District Court considered about 5,336 cases. Some of those did not persist long enough to involve a substantive decision by the Court, but those that did require at least three judges to decide. The appellate courts consider and decide cases generally in panels of three judges. Some minority cases are considered by an entire appellate court, called an en banc review.
The vast majority (60%) of the cases reviewed were criminal cases (3,197) followed by civil (1,424; 27%), and administrative (560, 10%). Of that 5,336, only 3% (155) were workers' compensation cases. And, the volume of workers' compensation cases at the Court has been diminishing since 2009, when there were 522 such appeals filed. It is noteworthy that all workers' compensation appeals in Florida are within the jurisdiction of the First District. Thus, comparisons year-over-year, reflect the overall state volume of workers' compensation appeals.
Following declines for four consecutive years, the total in 2012 was 243. For three years thereafter, the volume decreased, but almost imperceptibly: 2013 = 243; 2014 = 239; 2015 = 235. In 2016 and 2017, the volume barely exceeded 200: 2016 = 209; 2017 = 206. That the 2018 volume follows a downward trend is perhaps therefore minimally surprising. However, that in 9 years the volume of workers' compensation appeals would be down 70% might be seen as significant by some (522 - 155 = 367; 367/522 = 70%).
Who is filing workers' compensation appeals? Injured workers are seeking review in 72% of those cases filed in 2018; the employer/carrier in 25%. Another 1% was filed by former counsel for some party.
There is a notable distinction in the disposition of appealed cases. Overall, 51% of appeals to the First District in 2018 were "affirmed," 42% were "dismissed or transferred" (reinforcing the point above that not all cases required a substantive decision), and 7% were reversed.
That can be compared with workers' compensation cases. In workers' compensation cases, 53% were affirmed compared to the 51% overall. The "reverse" in workers' compensation was also higher, 12%, than the overall rate of 7%. That, logically, leads to the volume of "dismissed or transferred" in workers' compensation being lower, 35%, compared to the 42% overall. So, more workers' compensation cases reach the merits (65%) than cases overall do (58%).
That can be compared with workers' compensation cases. In workers' compensation cases, 53% were affirmed compared to the 51% overall. The "reverse" in workers' compensation was also higher, 12%, than the overall rate of 7%. That, logically, leads to the volume of "dismissed or transferred" in workers' compensation being lower, 35%, compared to the 42% overall. So, more workers' compensation cases reach the merits (65%) than cases overall do (58%).
The District Court also is responsible for deciding issues that are not appeals but are "extraordinary writs." The distinction is discussed in Writ Protection as Opposed to Appeal. The distinctions are as pronounced comparing "all petitions" (petition for writ of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, etc.) to the workers' compensation petitions.
Overall, 10% of petitions were granted in 2018, 41% were denied, and 49% were "dismissed or transferred." In workers' compensation, there were no petitions granted (0%), 56% denied and 44% "dismissed or transferred." So, again, more petitions in workers' compensation reached a decision on the merits (56%) than did so in the overall analysis, 51% (41% + 10%).
Overall, 10% of petitions were granted in 2018, 41% were denied, and 49% were "dismissed or transferred." In workers' compensation, there were no petitions granted (0%), 56% denied and 44% "dismissed or transferred." So, again, more petitions in workers' compensation reached a decision on the merits (56%) than did so in the overall analysis, 51% (41% + 10%).
Finally, the presentation provides insight into how cases are disposed of. These statistics support that the majority of cases are "dispositions by opinion." That does not mean, however, that they were lengthy, explanatory decisions. In fact, most often in either the civil or workers' compensation categories it is the brief per curium decision that concludes the case.
Overall, in civil cases, about 53% were "dispositions by opinion," and in workers' compensation, about 65% were. The "dispositions by opinion" are in two forms, a per curium affirmance or denial category (PCA/PCD) and a "written opinion" category. In both civil (59%) and workers' compensation (78%) the majority of "dispositions by opinion" are either a brief PCA or PCD. Those opinions do not generally provide an explanation of the rationale for the Court's decision. These decisions, while "opinions," are essential that the trial judge is affirmed or the petition is denied.
Overall, in civil cases, about 53% were "dispositions by opinion," and in workers' compensation, about 65% were. The "dispositions by opinion" are in two forms, a per curium affirmance or denial category (PCA/PCD) and a "written opinion" category. In both civil (59%) and workers' compensation (78%) the majority of "dispositions by opinion" are either a brief PCA or PCD. Those opinions do not generally provide an explanation of the rationale for the Court's decision. These decisions, while "opinions," are essential that the trial judge is affirmed or the petition is denied.
It is noteworthy that there is no "precedential value" to a per curium affirmance or denial, as explained by the Florida Supreme Court in Department of Legal Affairs v. District Court of Appeal, 5th District, 434 So. 2d 310 (Fla 1983). There, the Court clearly held that an appellate decision "with no written opinion" has no precedential value. It stated that "the rationale and basis for the decision without opinion is always subject to speculation." In other words, the foundation for precedential value is in knowing why a court decided as it did.
Nonetheless, the Supreme Court held that it is not improper to cite such an opinion in order to call "a court's attention to one of its own unwritten decisions." That does not mean that it is "a precedent" or that it should be "relied upon," but such a citation would not be improper. But, neither would a decision by the court to disregard that citation be improper.
These statistics illustrate that workers' compensation is a small percentage of the cases in one of the five Florida District Courts. And, that percentage is decreasing. Further, the appeals and petitions in workers' compensation are each more likely to reach a decision on the merits of the appellate review than are appeals and petitions in civil cases in that Court. And, those decisions of workers' compensation cases are less likely to result in a substantive written opinion that brings precedential authority.
It remains unclear why workers' compensation is different. However, the statistics seem to clarify that it is indeed different.
Nonetheless, the Supreme Court held that it is not improper to cite such an opinion in order to call "a court's attention to one of its own unwritten decisions." That does not mean that it is "a precedent" or that it should be "relied upon," but such a citation would not be improper. But, neither would a decision by the court to disregard that citation be improper.
These statistics illustrate that workers' compensation is a small percentage of the cases in one of the five Florida District Courts. And, that percentage is decreasing. Further, the appeals and petitions in workers' compensation are each more likely to reach a decision on the merits of the appellate review than are appeals and petitions in civil cases in that Court. And, those decisions of workers' compensation cases are less likely to result in a substantive written opinion that brings precedential authority.
It remains unclear why workers' compensation is different. However, the statistics seem to clarify that it is indeed different.
