Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...ahassee, Brevard County, Pasco County, Marion County, Manatee County, St. Johns County, and the City of Gainesville. Liner alleged that the class contained more than 500 day laborers and sought relief in the amount of $1000 per violation pursuant to section 448.25(1)....

...On February 2, 2005, WTS filed a counterclaim for declaratory relief. Specifically, WTS sought a judicial declaration that (1) it had complied with the Act; [2] (2) section 448.24(1)(b) is unconstitutionally vague; and (3) the statutory-damages provision of section 448.25(1) is unconstitutionally excessive....

...Thus, the parties contemplated that any order of the trial court would constitute a judgment on liability only, not damages. The trial court subsequently ruled that (1) WTS had complied with the Act; (2) section 448.24(1)(b) is unconstitutionally vague; and (3) the statutory-damages provision of section 448.25(1) is unconstitutionally excessive....

...(2004) (entitled "Legislative intent"). While the Act is designed to remedy a specific evil, we nevertheless conclude that section 448.24(1)(b) is a civil statute that is penal in nature because of the potentially extreme punitive damages provided by section 448.25(1)....

...inst the labor pool responsible for such violation. In any action commenced pursuant to this part, the worker shall be entitled to recover actual and consequential damages, or $1,000, whichever is greater, for each violation of this part, and costs. § 448.25(1), Fla....

...(2004) (entitled "Remedies; damages; costs") (emphasis *478 supplied). Due to the nature of a claim filed pursuant to section 448.24(1)(b), the actual damages suffered by a complainant will usually be significantly less than the statutory damages ($1000 per violation) afforded by section 448.25(1)....

...s. It must also be remembered that the $1.50 fee that WTS charged for transportation to its Broward County worksites is very similar in amount to the cost of other inexpensive forms of bus-system transportation. As reflected in the plain language of section 448.25(1), the Legislature contemplated that the statutory-damages provision of $1000 per violation would virtually always yield an amount that would significantly exceed any actual damages produced by a violation of section 448.24(1)(b). Thus, section 448.24(1)(b), interpreted in light of section 448.25(1), is a civil statute of a penal nature....

...mpanies from exploiting—albeit through a transportation charge that may only slightly exceed the cost of other inexpensive forms of mass transportation—the day laborers that they employ. Thus, section 448.24(1)(b), interpreted in pari materia with section 448.25(1), is penal in nature, and any ambiguities must be construed in favor of WTS....

...[11] Consequently, the term "public transportation" cannot be limited exclusively to the cost of bus travel under the circumstances of the instant case, and for that reason alone, WTS is not liable to Liner under section 448.24(1)(b). *482 B. Constitutionality of the Act WTS also asserts that both section 448.24(1)(b) and section 448.25(1), Florida Statutes (2004), violate the Due Process Clauses of the United States and Florida Constitutions....

...Pallotto, 239 So.2d 252, 253 (Fla.1970) (substantially similar); P.C. Lissenden Co. v. Bd. of County Comm'rs, 116 So.2d 632, 633-36 (Fla.1959) (substantially similar). Thus, we do not address the constitutionality of either section 448.24(1)(b) or section 448.25(1) because, as previously discussed, the trial court properly applied the statute and determined that WTS is not liable to Liner under the Act....

...e modes of transportation that do not follow fixed routes (taxicab service being the primary example). These more expensive fares thus increased the above-listed average cost. [5] The Fourth District did not affirm the ruling of the trial court that section 448.25(1) is unconstitutional. See Liner, 962 So.2d at 346 n. 2 ("The circuit court also held that section 448.25 is unconstitutional. We do not agree that the section is unconstitutionally vague."). We do not address the constitutionality of section 448.25(1) because this question is unnecessary to our resolution of this case....

...Brown of Ford & Harrison, LLP, Orlando, and Allen J. McKenna of Ford & Harrison, LLP, Orlando for amicus curiae Florida Management Attorneys, Inc. GROSS, J. This case concerns the constitutionality of a section of the Labor Pool Act, Sections 448.20-448.25, Florida Statutes (2003)....

...but in no event shall the amount exceed the prevailing rate for public transportation in the geographic area[.] For each violation of the Act, a worker is entitled to recover the greater of "actual and consequential damages" or $1,000, and "costs." § 448.25(1), Fla....

...Because we hold that the statute is unconstitutional, we do not address the circuit court's rulings on these issues. Liner contended that he was overcharged 50 cents for each trip and that he incurred $265 in actual damages; Liner sought statutory damages of $177,000 under section 448.25(1)....

...NOTES [1] Section 448.24(1)(b) was amended in 2006 to state: (1) No labor pool shall charge a day laborer: . . . . (b) More than a reasonable amount to transport a worker to or from the designated worksite, but in no event shall the amount exceed $1.50 each way[.] [2] The circuit court also held that section 448.25 is unconstitutional....

...County geographic area. It concluded that in order to comply with section 448.24(1)(b), $1 was the maximum amount Workforce could have deducted from Mr. Pollard's pay and found that Workforce violated the statute on IN occasions. In accordance with section 448.25, the trial court awarded Mr....

...County geographic area. It concluded that in order to comply with section 448.24(1)(b), $1 was the maximum amount Workforce could have deducted from Mr. Pollard's pay and found that Workforce violated the statute on 160 occasions. In accordance with section 448.25, the trial court awarded Mr....