HERMAN J. HEIDRICH & SONS, PENINSULAR FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, SERVICED BY: CORPORATE GROUP SERVICE, INC., APPELLANTS,
v.
JAMES R. FLOYD AND DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, 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 and insurance carrier appealed a deputy commissioner's order requiring them to provide a workers' compensation claimant with medical examination and treatment at Duke University Medical School in North Carolina. The court affirmed, holding that out-of-state medical treatment may be required when local facilities cannot provide equally beneficial care.
The deputy commissioner's order requiring out-of-state medical treatment was proper. The availability of local treatment facilities does not, by itself, conclude the issue; the controlling question is whether those facilities can provide equally beneficial treatment. The deputy properly relied on medical evidence from a prior hearing that was sufficiently elaborated in a prior compensation order in the record.
[1] An employer and carrier must provide out-of-state medical treatment when equally beneficial treatment is not available in the state.
[2] The availability of local treatment facilities alone does not preclude an award of out-of-state medical treatment.
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“the availability of local treatment facilities does not, in and of itself, conclude the issue; and that the controlling question is whether those facilities can afford equally beneficial treatment”
Establishes the legal standard for determining when out-of-state medical treatment is appropriate under workers' compensation law
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, James R. Floyd, was injured and required medical treatment. The deputy commissioner ordered the employer and carrier to provide medical …
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.
ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., Chief Judge.
The employer and carrier appeal from the deputy commissioner’s order requiring that they provide claimant medical examination and treatment at the Duke University Medical School in Durham, North Carolina. The deputy’s order satisfies the standard for out-of-state medical treatment established by Decker v. City of West Palm Beach, 379 So. 2d 1004 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), and its antecedents, by finding in effect that equally beneficial treatment is not available in Florida. The deputy rightly held that the availability of local treatment facilities does not, in and of itself, conclude the issue; and that the controlling question is whether those facilities can afford equally beneficial treatment. Neither do we find fault with the order’s reference, a predicate for the ultimate finding complained of here, to medical evidence introduced at an earlier hearing, indicating the likely extent of benefits from further local medical efforts. As against appellants’ claim that this reference violates IRC decisions1 precluding consideration of medical evidence introduced at a prior hearing but not at the hearing on the matter now in issue, we find that the evidence referred to was sufficiently elaborated in the deputy’s prior compensation order, which without objection was part of the record in the present proceedings, to support the deputy’s ultimate finding now that out-of-state medical treatment is reasonably required.
AFFIRMED.
MILLS and SHIVERS, JJ., concur. . City of Hallandale v. Jones, IRC Order 2-3440 (1978); Davidson v. Nezelek, IRC Order 2-3229 (1977); Newman v. Burdine’s Dadeland, IRC Order 2-2826(P) (July 25, 1975); IRC Order 2-2960 (Feb. 24, 1976), cert. denied, 339 So. 2d 1167 (Fla.1976).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Layne-Western Co. & Nat'l Union Ins. Co. v. COX, 497 So. 2d 955 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…er now on review. We regard the deputy’s order as having made an implicit finding that an out-of-state evaluation was necessary because equally beneficial treatment was not available in Florida. As we observed in Herman J. Heidrich & Sons v. Floyd, 406 So. 2d 1296, 1297 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), the controlling issue to be decided in determining whether out-of-state treatment should be directed at the carrier’s expense is not the availability of facilities within the state, but whether such facilities as are avail…
-
Lindsey v. J.R. & R. Enters. & Aetna Cas. & Sur. & Div. of Workers' Comp., 575 So. 2d 1296 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…aimant’s home state of Tennessee. As authority for this point, the employer/carrier relied upon Florida Cartage Co. v. Tyler, 90 So. 2d 291 (Fla.1956), Layne-Western Co. v. Cox, 497 So. 2d 955 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), Herman J. Heidrich & Sons v. Floyd, 406 So. 2d 1296 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), Decker v. City of West Palm Beach, 379 So. 2d 1004 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), and United Records & Tapes v. Deall, 378 So. 2d 99 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). Those cases are authority for the proposition that the employer/carrier will have no…
Authorities Cited
- Golden Hills Golf & Turf Club & S.C. Ins. Co. v. Crandell, 379 So. 2d 1004 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)