Latite Roofing & Sheet Metal Co. v. Barker
Docket: No. 4D03-3492
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; November 16, 2004; Florida; State Appellate Court
Latite Roofing and Sheet Metal Company, Inc. appealed a non-final order that denied its claim for workers’ compensation immunity. The appellate court reversed this order, determining that Latite Roofing was entitled to immunity as a statutory employer. In 1999, Latite Roofing contracted with Stiles Construction Company for roofing work on the Boulevard Square project and subcontracted with East Coast Metal Deck for labor. East Coast secured workers’ compensation insurance, naming Latite Roofing as the certificate holder, and employed Timothy Barker, who was injured on the job and received benefits. Barker subsequently sued Latite Roofing, alleging it sold a defective roof deck. According to Florida Statutes section 440.11(1), an employer's liability is exclusive and replaces all other liabilities to the employee. Section 440.10(1)(b) defines a statutory employer, holding that contractors are liable for compensation to employees of subcontractors unless the subcontractor has secured such payment. The court referenced the precedent set in Dempsey v. G. E Construction Co., where a subcontractor was held immune from suit by an employee of its sub-subcontractor due to its obligation to provide workers’ compensation. In this case, Latite Roofing, as a subcontractor to Stiles, was found to be a statutory employer of Barker, who received workers’ compensation from East Coast. Barker’s argument that Latite Roofing breached its contract with Stiles by using a subcontractor without written permission did not affect its statutory employer status, as the focus of the statute is on ensuring workers’ compensation coverage. Latite Roofing had secured the necessary coverage for Barker's injury, thereby entitling it to immunity despite the alleged breach of contract. The appellate court concluded that there was sufficient evidence of Latite Roofing’s subcontract with East Coast and remanded the case for an order recognizing Latite Roofing's entitlement to workers’ compensation immunity. The judges concurred, and the court asserted jurisdiction under relevant Florida appellate rules.