Kenneth B. Schwartz, P.A., is the law and mediation practice of attorney Ken Schwartz, Board Certified Specialist (B.C.S.) in Workers' Compensation Law. Mr. Schwartz handles litigation, trials, and appeals of contested, adversarial matters, as well as mediation conferences as a neutral to help the parties in a legal dispute resolve their matters without the cost, delay, and uncertainty of further litigation.
Why does Board Certification Specialist (BCS) Status Matter?
Board certification recognizes attorneys' special knowledge, skills, and proficiency in various areas of law and professionalism and ethics in practice. Certification is the highest level of evaluation by The Florida Bar of the competency and experience of attorneys in the areas of law approved for certification. Established in 1982 by the Florida Supreme Court, board certification helps consumers identify specialists in various areas of law, including Workers' Compensation Law, where there are fewer than 200 certified practitioners (out of more than 100,000 lawyers in the state). Board Certified Lawyers are the only ones permitted by the Florida Bar to say that they are: "Evaluated for Professionalism and Tested for Expertise" and call themselves experts in their fields. Mr. Schwartz has been Board Certified in Workers' Compensation Law since 2014.
What does it mean to be certified?
- Board certified lawyers have a minimum of five years in law practice.
- Certified lawyers must show substantial involvement in the field of law for which certification is sought.
- They must receive a passing grade on the examination required of all applicants or meet strict criteria to exempt the exam before officially earning board certification; each specialty has a different exam.
- Certified lawyers must satisfy a peer review assessment of their competence in the specialty field plus character, ethics, and professionalism in the practice of law.
- Certified lawyers must satisfy the certification area’s continuing legal education requirements.
- Board certified lawyers must continue to practice law and attend Florida Bar-approved continuing legal education courses to be recertified, much like those lawyers who must meet initial certification requirements.
- Watch a short video (0:51) from The Florida Bar called "The Board Certification Advantage."
- Download a 1-page .pdf pamphlet from The Florida Bar titled "Why Retain a Board-Certified Lawyer?"
Mr. Schwartz handles litigation, trials, and appeals of business and employment matters, including the following:
In his capacity as an appellate attorney, Mr. Schwartz has been solely or primarily responsible for more than 100 appeals and petitions for extraordinary writs (e.g., certiorari, mandamus), several of which involved presenting oral argument to an appellate court. Many of his cases have generated written opinions, and several continue to be cited by the appellate courts for their precedential value. Mr. Schwartz also provides trial support to attorneys throughout the state, including researching complex issues, drafting motions (e.g., rehearing, in anticipation of appeal) and memoranda, and advising on issues of "preservation of error" for appeal. In April 2014, Mr. Schwartz was selected as one of Florida's "Legal Elite" by Florida Trend magazine, which was published in July 2014. The publication recognizes "the top attorneys in the state as chosen by their peers."
Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
The mediation process can be described as an interactive process where a neutral third party (i.e., the mediator) assists disputing parties in resolving conflict through the use of specialized communication and negotiation techniques. All participants in mediation are encouraged to participate in the process. Mediation is a "party-centered" process, in that it is focused primarily upon the needs, rights, and interests of the parties. The mediator uses a wide variety of techniques to guide the process in a constructive direction and to help the parties find their optimal solution. A mediator manages the interaction between parties and facilitates open, but confidential, communication about the facts, the legal issues, and the practical realities that led to and arise out of the underlying disputes. A mediator does not, however, decide matters for the parties or provide either side with legal advice or opinion.
For more information about the process generally or for information about obtaining Mr. Schwartz's services as a mediator in a pending dispute, please visit the Mediation
page on this site.
Kenneth B. Schwartz, P.A., serves clients primarily in Boca Raton, in Palm Beach County, as well as in Delray Beach, Boynton Beach, Lake Worth, West Palm Beach, Riviera Beach, Palm Beach Gardens, Greenacres, Atlantis, Manalapan, Hypoluxo, Jupiter, Tequesta, Juno Beach, Wellington, Highland Beach, Pahokee, Belle Glade, North Palm Beach, Lake Park, Palm Springs, Lake Clarke Shores, Royal Palm Beach. The firm also serves: Broward County, including Deerfield Beach, Ft. Lauderdale, Hollywood, Davie, Coconut Creek, Coral Springs, Pompano Beach, Lighthouse Point, Hillsboro Beach, Tamarac, Wilton Manors, Lauderhill, Sunrise, Plantation, Weston, Pembroke Pines, Davie, Miramar, and Hallandale Beach; Martin County, including Stuart, Hobe Sound, Indiantown, Jensen Beach, and Palm City; and St. Lucie County, including Port St. Lucie and Ft. Pierce. Depending on circumstances, Mr. Schwartz will accept cases from other areas in the state.
For more information, please fill out our Contact Form or telephone our office directly.
News / Updates
March 4, 2021: Mr. Schwartz presented the "Quarterly Review of Recently Issued Appellate Opinions" on behalf of the Appellate Practice Section of the Palm Beach County Bar Association. Done through Zoom, this was his first entirely "virtual" speaking engagement. With only 1 hour to cover three months of opinions from the five DCAs and the Supreme Court, he managed to address such topics as the new "federal summary judgment" standard that will take effect in Florida May 1, 2021; fraud, in both workers' compensation and in civil litigation, apparent agency of a hospital in a medical malpractice case, and his recent appellate win in Cristin v. Everglades Correctional Institution, which dealt with the admissibility of expert witness testimony.
December 31, 2020: The First District Court of Appeal announced their ruling in Cristin v. Everglades Correctional Institution, a case Mr. Schwartz had by that time been handling for more than six years. The DCA agreed with Mr. Schwartz and ruled that both trial judges who handled the case (one retired, so another took over) committed legal error by not considering the merits of his objections to the admissibility of "expert" testimony of the insurance company's neurologist witness. This allowed the EMA to weigh in, with "presumptively correct" opinions that could be set aside only by proving by "clear and convincing evidence" that they should be. The Claimant lost at trial, due at least in part to the JCCs' erroneous rulings, which got overturned on appeal. The case is now back before one of the incorrect judges for further consideration, including the proper consideration of the Claimant's Daubert objections (which the DCA also ruled on the Cross-appeal were timely made).
December 30, 2020: In a case where Mr. Schwartz represents the Employer, he was forced to go to trial to defend against a claim that his client needed to provide "treatment" with a neurosurgeon, where (a) the recommending pain mgmt physician never recommended treatment but rather merely a "consultation"; where the Carrier provided the consultation that was requested with a neurosurgeon (albeit on far away) at a live visit; the neurosurgeon testified that, although he completed the consultation, he was willing to see the Claimant again either live or virtually (but she refused) to discuss the follow-up MRI (that the Carrier offered and paid for) and injections he recommended for her (that she continues to refuse). The JCC correctly found that the Employer/Carrier did what they were supposed to have done by providing the neurosurgical consultation, which was provided at a distance not unreasonable under the circumstances. Although Mr. Schwartz won the case, the other side is presently appealing the matter, which Mr. Schwartz will defend.
More news here...