RAYMOND C. OLSON, D.D.S. AND CHUBB/PACIFIC INDEMNITY COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
CHARLES WAGNER, 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.
In a workers' compensation case, the court affirmed the Deputy Commissioner's finding that the claimant suffered a work-related injury but reversed and remanded regarding the excusing of physicians' failure to timely file medical bills and reports, finding the reasoning inadequate.
The court affirmed that substantial competent evidence supported the finding of a work-related injury arising out of and in the course of employment. However, the court reversed the excusing of the physicians' filing failures because the reasoning was inadequate and remanded for the deputy to consider whether good cause or waiver exists based on proper legal standards.
[1] Substantial competent evidence in the record supports a deputy commissioner's finding that a claimant received an injury by accident arising out of and in the course and…
[2] A deputy commissioner may not excuse physicians' failure to file medical bills and reports based on the nature of the case or the physicians' infrequent dealings with wor…
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“A review of the record indicates there was substantial competent evidence to support the deputy's finding in this regard, so we affirm as to this point.”
Establishes the court's standard of review and affirms the compensability finding
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCharles Wagner claimed a work-related injury. Physicians treating Wagner failed to file timely medical bills and reports as required by Florida law. T…
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.
PER CURIAM.
Appellants, in their first point, have urged that the Deputy Commissioner erred in finding that the claimant received an injury by accident arising out of and in the course and scope of his employment. A review of the record indicates there was substantial competent evidence to support the deputy’s finding in this regard, so we affirm as to this point.
Appellants’ second point, however, in which they argue that the deputy erred in excusing the physicians for their failure to file medical bills and reports presents a troublesome point. The deputy’s order excuses the physicians’ filings “because of the nature of the case and the fact that they [the doctors] very rarely deal with workmen’s compensation matters”. § 440.13, Fla.Stat. (1977). There is no evidence that the doctors were unfamiliar with compensation matters; in fact, evidence suggests the contrary. The findings are inadequate to review whether or not the deputy could excuse the lack of filing for other reasons. We, therefore, remand the case to the deputy for further consideration. On remand, the deputy should determine whether good cause or waiver is otherwise present as urged by appellee. In making this determination, the deputy should consider the purposes behind the filing of timely reports and the question of prejudice, if any, caused by the failure to file timely reports. Torres v. Eden Roc Hotel, 238 So. 2d 639 (Fla.1970); Jones v. Plantation Foods, 388 So. 2d 590 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). The deputy may take further evidence to make these findings.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
McCORD, SHIVERS and JOANOS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McDONALD'S & G.A.B. Bus. Servs., Inc. v. Weiler, 423 So. 2d 978 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)…o determine if good cause or waiver to excuse the non-compliance with the reporting requirements of section 440.13(1), Florida Statutes (1981) existed. Otherwise, the medical bills of Dr. Stillman and Dr. Crown should be disallowed. Olson v. Wagner, 390 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). Accordingly, the order is AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part and REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this opinion. SHAW and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.…
-
Cedars OF Lebanon Health Care Ctr., Inc. v. Summerset, 409 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)…1981); Gory Associated Industries v. Thomas, 402 So. 2d 1341 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Arkin Building Corporation v. Miller, 401 So. 2d 874 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Walt Disney World Company v. Schiebel, 397 So. 2d 1004 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Olson v. Wagner, 390 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). On remand, the deputy commissioner must make specific findings on this issue, and in doing so, he should consider the purposes behind the reporting requirement and the prejudice, if any, to the E/C by reason of the untimeliness…
Authorities Cited
- Pilar N. Torres v. Eden ROC Hotel, 238 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 1970)
- Jones v. Plantation Foods, 388 So. 2d 590 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)