KIMBERLY M. RAMSEY AND DELMAS RAMSEY, JR., AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ESTATE OF DELMAS RAMSEY, III, Appellants,
DEWITT EXCAVATING, INC. AND DAVID E. GUBBINS, SR., Appellees.
FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
from the Circuit Court for Lake County, Mark J. Hill, Judge.
B. Greenlee, of Andrew B. Greenlee, P.A., Sanford and Michael
B. Scoma, of Scoma Law Firm, Clermont, for Appellants.
C. Degnan and Sebastian C. Mejia, of Kubicki Draper, Orlando,
and Delmas Ramsey, Jr., as personal representatives of the
Estate of Delmas Ramsey, III (their deceased son), appeal the
final summary judgment entered by the trial court, ruling
that workers' compensation immunity barred their
liability claims against David Gubbins and DeWitt Excavating,
Inc. (DeWitt). We affirm as to DeWitt, but reverse as to
industrial accident resulting in Ramsey's death took
place while Ramsey was working for DeWitt and with Gubbins, a
fellow employee. The parents' complaint alleged that
Gubbins and DeWitt were liable for operating a cement-mixing
pug mill while Ramsey was still inside of the mixing box,
causing his death. DeWitt and Gubbins filed a motion seeking
the entry of summary judgment in their favor, arguing that
the parents' wrongful death claims were barred by
workers' compensation immunity. The court granted the
motion, and this appeal followed.
party moving for summary judgment
bears the burden of establishing that, based on the
pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories,
admissions, affidavits, and other material as would be
admissible in evidence on file, there is no genuine issue of
material fact and that it is entitled to a judgment as a
matter of law. Summary judgment evidence must be considered
in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and if
the record raises the possibility of any genuine issue of
material fact or even the slightest doubt that an issue might
exist, summary judgment is improper.
Penton Bus. Media Holdings, LLC v. Orange County,
236 So.3d 495, 497 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018) (citations omitted)
(internal quotation marks omitted). A final order entering a
summary judgment is reviewed de novo. Volusia County v.
Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So.2d 126, 130 (Fla.
R.L. Haines Construction, LLC v. Santamaria, we
summarized the law relating to workers' compensation
immunity, explaining that "employers in compliance with
the Workers' Compensation Law are immune from their
employees' common law negligence actions for damages
arising from work-related injuries." 161 So.3d 528, 530
(Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (citing Bakerman v. Bombay
Co., 961 So.2d 259, 262 (Fla. 2007)). However, section
440.11(1)(b) of the Florida Statutes (2013) creates an
exception to workers' compensation immunity as to
employers and employees acting in furtherance of the
employer's business. The statute reads, in relevant part,
440.11 Exclusiveness of liability.-
(1) The liability of an employer prescribed in s. 440.10
shall be exclusive and in place of all other liability . . ...