JEFF VYAJKORA, APPELLANT,
v.
FARM STORES AND EMPLOYEES INSURANCE OF WAUSAU, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The appellate court reviewed a denial of worker's compensation benefits. While affirming the denial of some benefits, the court reversed the denial of medical benefits, finding that a pre-existing condition aggravated by a workplace incident is compensable.
The court held that the denial of medical benefits was improper because a pre-existing condition that becomes symptomatic as a probable result of an accident is compensable. However, the denial of other benefits was affirmed due to lack of substantial evidence.
[1] A preexisting condition that becomes symptomatic as the probable result of an accident is compensable.
[2] Medical benefits are payable without regard to apportionment.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“However, a preexisting condition which becomes symptomatic as the probable result of an accident is compensable.”
Establishes the legal principle for compensating pre-existing conditions aggravated by workplace incidents.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe claimant alleged his eyes and nose began burning and itching after wiping a gasoline meter and then touching his nose. He sought worker's compensa…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Apportionment Of Benefits cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The order of the Judge of Industrial Claims denied the claimant worker’s compensation benefits, including medical benefits. We affirm except for the denial of medical benefits.
The claimant testified that while employed by Farm Stores, his eyes and nose began to burn and itch within minutes after wiping a gasoline meter with his finger and then rubbing his finger against his nose. The claimant was told to see a doctor of his choice, but he was never reimbursed for the visits or for medication. Subsequently, the employer and carrier contested all claims against them contending that the injuries were not caused by the gas meter incident. Although Dr. Grabow’s testimony is somewhat confusing, we think the judge misconstrued it in finding that it did not support a claim for benefits. The unrebutted deposition testimony of Dr. Grabow states that the accident probably caused claimant’s preexisting dry eye syndrome to become symptomatic whereas before it had been asymptomatic. Concededly, the accident did not cause the dry eye syndrome, nor was there any way to know if the accident precipitated the injury or whether the accident and injury were coincidental. E. g., Wright v. Bechtel Corporation, IRC Order 2-2991 (July 20, 1976), cert. denied, 345 So. 2d 420 (Fla.1977).
However, a preexisting condition which becomes symptomatic as the probable result of an accident is compensable. See generally, Robinette v.
E. R. Jahna Industries, Inc., 208 So. 2d 104 (Fla.1968); Simmons v. City of Coral Gables, 186 So. 2d 493 (Fla.1966). Further, medical benefits are payable without regard to apportionment. § 440.02(18), Florida Statutes (1977).
However, considering the totality of the record and the judge’s opportunity to observe the claimant, we find that there was substantial competent evidence supporting the finding that there was no permanent partial impairment of the eye and that claimant was not entitled to temporary total disability benefits.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part with instructions to consider a proper award of medical benefits.
McCORD, LARRY G. SMITH and SHIVERS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wallen v. Salon OF Music, Inc., 418 So. 2d 421 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)…of causal relationship .... As in Reynolds, the instant case contains competent, substantial evidence, based on the testimony of Drs. Gerard and Ray, to support a finding that the heart attack was compensable. Compare also Vyajkora v. Farm Stores, 378 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), in which this Court stated: Concededly, the accident did not cause the dry eye syndrome, nor was there any way to know if the accident precipitated the injury or whether the accident and injury were coincidental .. . However, a…
-
Coons v. Pete's Elec. & Se. Administrators, Inc., 543 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)…ting asymptomatic atherosclerotic or heart condition is aggravated or accelerated by an industrial accident, the resulting condition is compensable. See Wallen v. Salon of Music, Inc., 418 So. 2d 421 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); cf. Vyajkora v. Farm Stores, 378 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). In the instant case, Dr. Haggman’s testimony was clear that claimant’s accident aggravated and accelerated his preexisting cardiac disease and that the stress stemming from the [*822] accident played a large part m rendering cla…
Authorities Cited
- Simmons v. City OF Coral Gables, 186 So. 2d 493 (Fla. 1966)
- Robinette v. E. R. Jahna Indus., Inc., 208 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 1968)