SPECIAL DISABILITY TRUST FUND, APPELLANT,
v.
STARDUST ACRES AND FLORIDA FARM BUREAU INSURANCE COMPANY, 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 dissenting opinion argues that the 60-day filing limitation for reimbursement claims under Section 440.49(2)(g) bars an employer/carrier's claim for wage loss benefits because it was not timely filed.
The dissenting judge would reverse the deputy commissioner's order, holding that the employer/carrier's claim for reimbursement is barred by the 60-day statute of non-claim.
An employer/carrier sought reimbursement from the Special Disability Trust Fund for wage loss benefits paid to a claimant. The claim was filed more th…
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.
AFFIRMED.
BOOTH and SHAW, JJ., concur.
WENTWORTH, J., concurs with opinion.
Judge, concurring.
I find adequate record support for the award of Fund reimbursement on the ground that claimant’s preexisting impairment contributed medically to the need for remedial care and temporary benefits here in question. § 440.49(2)(e), Florida Statutes. The alternative finding of circumstantial contribution is in my opinion an appropriate acknowledgment that the medi cal contribution was indirect (as opposed to medical treatment of the prior condition directly), based on testimony that the prior impairment, even if not brought to attention of the treating doctor, prolonged the period of treatment for and recuperation from the new injury. Although the statutory reference to medical or circumstantial contribution is alternative, and may well refer also to circumstantial causation or contribution other than medical as appellant argues with reference to the “but for” merger principle of § 440.49(2)(b)2a, Florida Statutes, the statutory terms do not preclude the reasoning reflected by the deputy’s order.