OLA MAY MAYBERRY, APPELLANT,
v.
SUNLAND TRAINING CENTER AND DIVISION OF RISK MANAGEMENT, 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.
An employer's withholding of authorization for necessary medical treatment without offering alternatives violates workers' compensation law, and medical bills must be paid even if not formally introduced as exhibits when testimony establishes the charges and causation.
When an employer withholds authorization for necessary medical treatment without offering alternative treatment, the medical bills incurred are compensable under workers' compensation law.
[1] When an employer withholds authorization for necessary medical treatment of a compensable work injury without offering alternative treatment, the resulting medical expens…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“Under such circumstances, the Deputy Commissioner erred in denying payment of Dr. Cauthen's and North Florida Regional Hospital's bills incurred in the necessary treatment of the claimant's admittedly compensable injuries.”
Court's explanation of why the Deputy Commissioner's denial was erroneous
Mayberry suffered a work-related back injury. Dr. Cauthen requested authorization for back surgery in January 1980, which the employer/carrier withhel…
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 Unauthorized Medical Treatment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This cause is before us on appeal from a Deputy Commissioner’s order denying payment of certain medical bills incurred by the claimant in treatment of a back injury. The parties stipulated that the injury arose out of and in the course of her employment. The deputy ruled, however, that medical services rendered by Dr. Joseph Cauthen and by North Florida Regional Hospital in January, 1980, were unauthorized.
The employer/carrier stipulated that proper notice of the accident had been given, that Dr. Cauthen had requested authorization prior to performing back surgery, and that such authorization had been withheld without any offer of alternative treatment. Under such circumstances, the Deputy Commissioner erred in denying payment of Dr. Cauthen’s and North Florida Regional Hospital’s bills incurred in the necessary treatment of the claimant’s admittedly compensable injuries. See Hall's Camp, Inc. v. Decker, 394 So. 2d 1041 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Lance v. Witters, 270 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 1972). Claimant’s failure to introduce medical bills into evidence does not preclude the recovery of those expenses since Dr. Cau-then testified as to the amount of his charges and their causal connection to the claimant’s injury, See Hall’s Camp, Inc. v. Decker, supra at 1044, and the amount of North Florida Regional Hospital’s bills may be determined on remand. Accordingly, that portion of the Deputy Commissioner’s order denying payment of Dr. Cauthen’s and North Florida Regional Hospital’s medical bills is reversed and remanded for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.
BOOTH, SHAW and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fuchs Baking Co. & Emp'r's Serv. Corp. v. Est. of Francis Szlosek, 466 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)…that a claimant may seek unauthorized medical treatment where authorization has been requested and refused by the E/C. Cedars of Lebanon Health Care Center, Inc. v. Summerset, 409 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Mayberry v. Sunland Training Center, 404 So. 2d 810 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Section 440.13(2)(b) further provides: Nor shall any claim for medical, surgical, or other remedial treatment be valid and enforceable unless, within 10 days following the first treatment ... the health care provider or health…
-
Martin Marietta Corp. & Scott Wetzel Servs. v. Glumb, 523 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…84). Recovery for medical bills is not precluded, however, where the record establishes the causal connection between the charges and the claimant’s injury, and there is testimony as to the amount of the charges. Mayberry v. Sunland Training Center, 404 So. 2d 810 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). See also Sunland Center at [*1195] Miami v. Rudolph, 521 So. 2d 132,134 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Although the record in this case establishes a causal relationship between the charges for medical services and claimant’s injury, and…
-
Ramada INN v. Foster, 409 So. 2d 1087 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)…ives,2 cannot be heard to complain of lack of notice,3 nor can it be heard to complain of the order requiring payment of the cost of pain-relieving drugs needed to relieve claimant’s suffering in the interim. See Mayberry v. Sunland Training Center, 404 So. 2d 810 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). As appropriately pointed out by the deputy commissioner, the employer’s actions in this instance appear to run contrary to the self-executing nature of the worker’s compensation act. AFFIRMED. BOOTH, LARRY G. SMITH and SHIVERS…
Authorities Cited
- In re Transition Rule 7, 270 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 1972)
- Lance v. Witters Constr., 270 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 1972)
- Hall's Camp, Inc. v. Decker, 394 So. 2d 1041 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)