HOUSING BY VOGUE AND LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
OTIS HENDON, APPELLEE
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 court held that while a finding of mistake of fact was not supported, the modification of the compensation order was proper based on a change of condition.
Appellants challenged a deputy's order modifying a previous compensation order, which found the claimant temporarily and totally disabled due to epile…
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 Workers' Compensation Modification cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellants challenge the deputy’s order modifying a previous compensation order based on mistake of fact. The deputy found that claimant now had epileptic seizures which were a result of the previous industrial accident. He, therefore, found that claimant was temporarily and totally disabled since the date of the accident. This finding was based upon the testimony of Dr. Cauthen.
Appellants argue that since testimony as to claimant’s epileptic condition was in the record of the first hearing, when claimant was found to have no permanent head injury, a finding of mistake of fact was erroneous. We agree that the record does not support a finding of mistake of fact. However, we find that the record does support a change of condition. Dr. Cauthen’s testimony reveals that claimant’s seizures were more severe and much more frequent than those manifested prior to the first hearing. Therefore, we hold the modification was proper based upon a change of condition. See Rush Tractor Co., Inc. v. Keene, IRC Order 2-3298 (Dec. 21, 1977), cert. denied, 355 So. 2d 515 (Fla.1978).
As to all other points the order is affirmed. The order is clarified as follows: The carrier is to provide the claimant such medical care and attention as the nature of his injury and the process of his recovery might require under the direction of Dr. Joseph C. Cauthen from July 31, 1979 forward.
ERVIN and SHAW, JJ., and WOODROW M. MELVIN, (Retired) Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Emmett H. Massie v. Univ. OF Fla. & Div. of Risk Mgmt., 570 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…. 1st DCA 1981); City of West Palm Beach v. Chisolm, 405 So. 2d 279 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Heter v. Buning The Florist, 396 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); City of Vero Beach v. Thomas, 388 So. 2d 1374 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Housing By Vogue v. Hendon, 386 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Sheets v. City of Miami, 111 So. 2d 690 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959); Nix v. Merrill-Stevens Dry Dock & Repair Co., 107 So. 2d 616 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958), cert. denied, 109 So. 2d 573 (Fla.1959); Hall v. Seaboard Maritime Corp., 104 So. 2d 3…
-
N. Broward Hosp. Dist. & Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Gavagan, 398 So. 2d 1006 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)…ating physician, Dr. Rahilly, testified that claimant’s condition was worse than at the time of the prior hearing. This testimony was adequate to support the deputy commissioner’s (implied) finding of a changed condition. Housing by Vogue v. Hendon, 386 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). Appellant next contends that the deputy commissioner erred in finding a merger of the disabilities resulting from the 1973 accident and those resulting from the 1979 accident. The deputy commissioner found that with regard to t…