Skip to Content
Overview
David Hamilton Roos is the Chair of Henderson Franklin’s Workers’ Compensation Department and a member of the firm’s Executive Committee. He represents insurance carriers, third-party administrators, and employers in defending workers’ compensation claims.
A recognized leader in his field, Naples Illustrated has named David a “Top Lawyer” in Workers’ Compensation law every year since 2018. He has also contributed to legal scholarship, authoring and co-authoring articles on workers’ compensation fraud and legal developments, including:
- “Recent Legal Developments in Workers’ Compensation Law,” published in the Winter 2011 Trial Advocate Quarterly;
- “Defending A Workers’ Compensation Claim on the Basis of Fraudulent Identity Under Chapter 440, Florida Statutes,” published in the Fall 2004 Trial Advocate Quarterly; and,
- Co-authored the article “Using False Identification to Obtain Employment,” featured in the October 2008 edition of the Henderson Franklin’s employment law newsletter.
Before joining Henderson Franklin, David practiced in Broward and Miami-Dade counties, handling first-party homeowner property and casualty defense claims. A Southwest Florida native, he was born in Fort Myers and raised in Cape Coral. He lives in the area with his wife, Esther, and their three children, Abigail, Hannah, and Josiah.
Professional And Civic Affiliations
David is a member of the Lee County Bar Association and The Florida Bar (Workers’ Compensation and Trial Law Sections). He previously served as Chairman of the Workers’ Compensation Section of the Florida Defense Lawyers Association (FDLA).
Representative Matters
- Represented a workers’ compensation insurance carrier concerning a claim for temporary partial disability (“TPD”) indemnity benefits. The carrier prevailed at the final hearing and the claimant then appealed the decision to the First District Court of Appeals (“DCA”). The DCA had previously written several conflicting opinions on whether receiving unemployment benefits result in an “offset” or “credit” or “reduce” of the amount of TPD indemnity benefits a claimant can receive at the same time he/she is receiving TPD indemnity benefits. This case resolved the prior conflicting decisions in favor of the employer and carrier thus reducing liability for exposure for TPD indemnity benefits when an injured employee is also receiving unemployment benefits. The DCA also clarified that this defense is not an affirmative defense which must be specifically plead in accordance with procedural rules.