MABEL LAWHORN, APPELLANT,
v.
R. D. MULLINS, D. O. AND FIREMAN'S FUND AMERICAN INSURANCE, 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 court held that the deputy commissioner erred in denying temporary total disability benefits by finding maximum medical improvement was reached on December 31, 1980, as there was no competent substantial evidence to support this finding.
The claimant appealed a workers' compensation order denying temporary total disability benefits. The deputy commissioner found maximum medical improve…
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 Temporary Total Disability Benefits cases and more on FLexlaw
WIGGINTON, Judge.
In this workers’ compensation appeal, the claimant has raised three points for our review. We affirm the deputy commissioner’s order not requiring the employer/carrier to pay for claimant’s medical treatment administered by an unauthorized physician or claimant’s transportation to and from that physician’s office.
Claimant’s remaining issue questions whether the deputy commissioner erred in denying claimant temporary total disability benefits by finding that maximum medical improvement was reached on December 31, 1980, and that claimant’s medical condition had not significantly changed since that date. Our review of the record leads us to the conclusion that the deputy did err. There is no competent substantial evidence in the record to support a finding that claimant’s status changed from “healing” to “no further improvement reasonably anticipated” on December 31, 1980. Sunland Training Center v. Woods, 413 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). On the contrary, two physicians testified as to dates long before the one chosen by the deputy, while two other physicians testified that claimant had not yet reached MMI as of the date of the hearing on January 8, 1982. Interestingly, one of the latter physicians was one ordered by the deputy to treat claimant in order to settle inconsistent medical evidence, and both latter physicians were those on whose testimony the deputy based her finding of MMI.
It would appear from the record that the only significance of the date, December 31, 1980, was that it was the date on which the employer/carrier voluntarily ceased payment of temporary total disability payments to claimant.
We therefore reverse and remand to the deputy to make a redetermination of MMI based on competent substantial evidence. The deputy may take additional evidence to facilitate a proper determination in this regard.
SHIVERS AND SHAW, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lerman v. Broward Cnty. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs & Risk Mgmt. Div., 574 So. 2d 229 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…ployer having knowledge of such injury, failed to provide same. City of Leesburg v. Balliet, 413 So. 2d 860, 861 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Scherer & Sons, Inc. v. Hoepelman, 397 So. 2d 760, 761 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). See also Lawhorn v. R.D. Mullins, D.O., 418 So. 2d 366 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). The record in this case reflects that claimant did not ask the employer to provide psychiatric or psychological counseling. Further, claimant’s psychiatric or psychological injury was not of such nature that employer/carrier wou…
Authorities Cited
- Sunland Training Ctr. & Div. of Risk Mgmt. v. Stephenson Woods, 413 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)