A significant Florida Supreme Court decision has clarified when injuries resulting from workplace assaults may qualify for workers’ compensation benefits. As a result, employees who suffer injuries caused by third-party violence while performing their job duties may have stronger legal protections than previously recognized.

Recently, Insurance Journal highlighted this important ruling and its impact on workers across Florida. The article also recognized Michael Winer of Winer Law Group, who represented the injured worker during the litigation and previously explained why the lower court's interpretation would have produced an unfair result.
Understanding this decision is important because workplace violence cases often involve complex legal questions. Therefore, employees who have been injured during an assault at work should understand how Florida law may apply to their situation.
Winer Law Group Featured in Insurance Journal
This important Florida Supreme Court decision was recently covered by Insurance Journal, one of the nation’s leading insurance and workers’ compensation publications.
Michael Winer, founder of Winer Law Group, represented the injured worker during the litigation and was previously quoted by Insurance Journal regarding the legal issues involved in the case.

"If the 1st DCA decision had been upheld, it would have created an absurd situation in which workplace accidents are compensated but shootings are not."
The Florida Supreme Court ultimately rejected the lower court’s interpretation and restored a broader understanding of when workplace injuries may qualify for workers’ compensation benefits.
The case involved a hotel manager who was shot multiple times while walking between work locations at the end of his shift.
Although the employee was clearly performing work-related duties, the workers’ compensation insurance carrier argued that the assault was based upon a personal dispute rather than employment.
Initially, a workers’ compensation judge ruled that the employee’s work environment substantially contributed to the risk of injury. However, Florida’s First District Court of Appeal later reversed that decision and adopted a much narrower interpretation of the law.
The Florida Supreme Court unanimously disagreed.
Instead of requiring the employee’s specific job task to directly cause the injury, the Court concluded that injuries may still qualify when employment places the worker in circumstances that increase the risk of harm.
One of the most important aspects of the decision involves the meaning of “arising out of employment.”
The appellate court had focused almost entirely on the employee’s immediate activity, concluding that simply walking between work locations could not have caused the assault.
The Supreme Court rejected that reasoning.
Instead, the Court explained that Florida law considers the overall employment circumstances, including whether the employee’s duties and work environment exposed them to an increased occupational risk.
This interpretation restores a more practical application of Florida’s workers’ compensation law and recognizes that not every workplace injury is caused by a machine, tool, or physical task.
What This Decision Means for Florida Workers
Although every case depends upon its individual facts, this decision provides important guidance for employees who suffer injuries during workplace assaults.
Examples may include:
However, benefits are not automatic.
Workers must still establish that the injury arose out of and occurred within the course and scope of employment under Florida law.
Cases involving workplace assaults frequently involve disputed facts.
Insurance companies may argue:
Because these cases often involve complicated legal questions, experienced representation can become especially important.
This case demonstrates why experience matters.
Michael Winer represented the injured worker throughout the litigation and helped advance legal arguments that ultimately prevailed before the Florida Supreme Court.
His involvement was also recognized by Insurance Journal, which highlighted his comments regarding the broader impact the appellate court’s decision would have had on injured Florida workers.
When legal issues reach Florida’s appellate courts, the outcome can affect workers throughout the state. This decision now provides additional guidance for future workers’ compensation claims involving workplace violence.
If you have been injured during an assault at work, several important steps should be taken as soon as possible.
Every case is unique, and early legal guidance may help protect your rights.
Workers’ compensation claims involving workplace violence are among the most legally complex cases in Florida. Insurance companies frequently dispute whether an assault was truly work-related, which can place injured employees at risk of losing the benefits they deserve.
At Winer Law Group, workers’ compensation law is more than just another practice area. Michael Winer has represented injured workers in complex and precedent-setting litigation, including the Florida Supreme Court case discussed above. That experience provides valuable insight into how these claims are evaluated by judges, insurance carriers, and appellate courts.
If your workers’ compensation claim has been denied, delayed, or questioned after a workplace assault or serious injury, our team is prepared to help you understand your legal options.
Schedule a free consultation today to discuss your situation and protect your rights.
Workplace injuries should generally be reported to an employer within 30 days.
In most situations, treatment must be obtained through an authorized workers’ compensation physician.
Denied claims may be challenged through Florida’s workers’ compensation system.
Many repetitive stress injuries may qualify for workers’ compensation benefits if they are work-related.
In most situations, workers’ compensation serves as the exclusive remedy against an employer, although exceptions may apply.
By you using this website and the electronic mailbox contained within, you agree not to transmit any case-related documents, including, but not limited to, pleadings, service of process, correspondence or any other case-related documentation of a time-sensitive nature.
YOU ARE NOT ESTABLISHING AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP BY COMPLETING THIS FORM. YOU ARE NOT A CLIENT UNLESS AND UNTIL YOU RECEIVE A SIGNED WRITTEN REPRESENTATION AGREEMENT FROM THE FIRM.