A recent Florida Supreme Court decision has important implications for employers throughout our state. While the case centers on workers’ compensation law, it also highlights something every business owner should be thinking about: creating the safest possible environment for employees.
Before discussing the legal implications, it is important to acknowledge the human side of this case.
In Bouayad v. Normandy Insurance Company (Fla. July 9, 2026), Mohammed Bouayad, a rental car manager working near Orlando International Airport, was shot multiple times while walking between work locations at the end of his shift. He survived but sustained devastating injuries, including strokes, the loss of a kidney, and partial vision loss. Regardless of the legal issues involved, this was a tragic event that forever changed the lives of Mr. Bouayad and his family.
The facts surrounding the shooting made the legal dispute especially complex. Although the shooter was never identified or convicted, evidence presented in the case indicated that Mr. Bouayad identified the suspected gunman as someone who allegedly held a personal vendetta against him and his family. There was no evidence that the shooting was an attempted robbery, and the allegations suggested the attack may have been motivated by personal reasons rather than by Mr. Bouayad performing his job.
The Florida Supreme Court’s decision focused on whether, despite those facts, his injuries qualified for workers’ compensation benefits.
What the Court Decided
The Court overturned an earlier decision from Florida’s First District Court of Appeal that had taken a much narrower view of compensability.
The lower court concluded that because Mr. Bouayad was simply walking when he was attacked, the act of walking did not itself cause the injury. It also relied heavily on evidence suggesting the shooting stemmed from a personal dispute rather than anything connected to his employment.
The Florida Supreme Court disagreed with that analysis.
Rather than deciding whether the attack ultimately qualified as a purely personal assault, the Court held that the lower court had improperly resolved disputed facts when deciding the case. The justices explained that Florida law requires courts to consider whether employment exposed a worker to an increased risk of injury and that factual disputes about the cause of an assault should not be decided against the injured employee without a full evidentiary determination.
The Court pointed to evidence that Mr. Bouayad regularly worked late at night, walked between work locations, and worked in an area where conditions such as limited lighting, landscaping that could conceal an attacker, and other environmental factors could increase the risk of a violent assault. Those workplace conditions were sufficient for the Court to conclude that the claim should not have been dismissed under the narrow standard applied by the lower court.
Importantly, the Court did not hold that every workplace assault automatically qualifies for workers’ compensation benefits. Nor did it decide that assaults motivated by purely personal reasons are always compensable. Instead, the ruling restores a broader framework for evaluating these claims by requiring courts to consider the totality of the employment conditions and allowing factual disputes to be resolved through the proper legal process.
Why This Matters to Employers
For Florida business owners, this decision is about much more than workers’ compensation law.
It serves as a reminder that workplace safety extends beyond preventing slips, falls, or lifting injuries. Employers should also be evaluating the physical security of their workplaces and asking whether reasonable steps can be taken to reduce the risk of violence.
Businesses with employees who work evenings, work alone, interact with the public, handle cash, travel between buildings, or operate in higher crime areas may want to take an even closer look at their safety and security practices.
Some areas worth reviewing include:
- Exterior lighting
- Building access and security procedures
- Surveillance cameras
- Landscaping that may reduce visibility or create hiding places
- Parking lot safety
- Emergency response plans
- Workplace violence prevention training
- Employee reporting procedures for threats or concerning behavior
No employer can eliminate every risk. Criminal acts can occur even when businesses have taken reasonable precautions. At the same time, regularly evaluating your workplace for potential vulnerabilities is simply good business practice. It helps protect employees, strengthens your overall risk management strategy, and may reduce the likelihood of a serious incident.
A Good Opportunity to Review Your Safety Plan
The decision in Bouayad v. Normandy Insurance Company is likely to become one of the most significant Florida workers’ compensation decisions in recent years. As reported by Insurance Journal, the ruling broadens the framework courts must use when evaluating whether injuries resulting from workplace assaults are compensable under Florida law.
For business owners, the takeaway is not to become fearful.
The takeaway is to be proactive.
Every workplace is different, but every employer benefits from periodically evaluating safety procedures, physical security, and emergency planning. Investing in prevention is about more than reducing claims or managing costs. It is about doing everything reasonably possible to help ensure that employees return home safely at the end of every workday.
Sources
- Bouayad v. Normandy Insurance Company, Florida Supreme Court, No. SC2023-1307 (July 9, 2026).
- William Rabb, “Fla. Supreme Court Reverses Lower Court on Compensability of a Workplace Shooting,” Insurance Journal, July 10, 2026.
