PEPSI COLA BOTTLING CO. AND WHITING NATIONAL SERVICES, APPELLANTS,
v.
WILLIE J. WALKER, 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 this workers' compensation appeal, the court affirmed the deputy commissioner's award of temporary total disability benefits to the claimant, finding competent substantial evidence that the injury resulted from an industrial accident rather than Reiter's Syndrome. However, the court reversed and remanded regarding the employer/carrier's entitlement to credit overpaid wage-loss benefits against unpaid temporary total disability benefits.
The court affirmed the award of TTD benefits, finding competent substantial evidence supporting the conclusion that the injury resulted from an industrial accident. However, the court reversed the denial of credit for overpayment, holding that overpaid compensation in one class of benefits may be applied as a credit against compensation of another class if a reasonable basis exists for the overpayment.
[1] Competent substantial evidence supports a deputy commissioner's conclusion that a claimant's injury resulted from an industrial accident, not a specific syndrome.
[2] An employer/carrier is entitled to reclassification of wage-loss benefits overpaid and a credit for such overpayment against unpaid benefits of another class, provided a…
Previewing 2 of 6 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] more moderate approach, and one that we hereby adopt, presumes that any overpayment of compensation is a gratuity in the absence of a finding that a reasonable basis exists for the overpayment If the Deputy finds such a basis the presumption is dissipated and he may allow the overpayment to be applied as a credit against compensation ultimately found to be due even though the compensation may be of another class.”
Establishes the legal standard for when overpaid benefits in one compensation class may be credited against unpaid benefits in another class.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceClaimant Willie J. Walker suffered a work-related injury and received temporary total disability (TTD) benefits from September 17, 1981 through Januar…
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 Wage Loss Benefits cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The Appellants, employer/carrier (e/c), in this workers’ compensation action contend that the deputy commissioner (the deputy) erred in awarding claimant temporary total disability (TTD) benefits from September 17, 1981 through January 14, 1982 and from January 29, 1982 through February 16, 1982. We disagree and find that there was competent substantial evidence to support the deputy’s conclusion that the claimant’s injury was the result of an industrial accident and not the result of Reiter’s Syndrome. Appellants alternatively contend that the deputy erred in finding that the e/c was not entitled to reclassification of wage-loss benefits overpaid from May 8, 1981 through July 8, 1981 and a credit for such overpayment. We agree and reverse paragraph 16 of the deputy’s order with instructions.
Although some confusion has existed in the past concerning the reclassification of benefits overpaid in one class of compensation and the application of such overpayment as a credit against unpaid benefits of another class such confusion was eliminated by our decision in Belam Florida Corporation v. Dardy, 397 So. 2d 756 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). In Dardy we rejected the misconception that overpayment of compensation in one class of benefits could never be applied as a credit when a different class of benefits is found to be due and we stated that
[a] more moderate approach, and one that we hereby adopt, presumes that any overpayment of compensation is a gratuity in the absence of a finding that a reasonable basis exists for the overpayment If the Deputy finds such a basis the presumption is dissipated and he may allow the overpayment to be applied as a credit against compensation ultimately found to be due even though the compensation may be of another class. We expressly recede from any decision by this court to the contrary.
Id. at 758. When the e/c seeks a credit for overpayment, it is incumbent on the deputy to determine whether a reasonable basis exists for such overpayment. State of Florida, Division of Family Services v. Varela, 418 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
Accordingly, we reverse paragraph 16 of the deputy’s order and remand this case with directions to the deputy to calculate the amount of wage-loss benefits which were paid to claimant from May 8, 1981 through September 17, 1981 and to determine also whether a reasonable basis existed for such overpayment. If the overpayment was reasonable, the e/c must be allowed a credit against any unpaid TTD benefits awarded. If no benefits remain unpaid, or if the amount of such credit would exceed the unpaid TTD benefits, such excess portion of the overpayment must be considered gratuitous and may not be recovered by the e/c. Cf. State of Florida, Division of Family Services v. Varela.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part and REMANDED.
ERVIN, LARRY G. SMITH and SHIVERS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Belam v. Dardy, 397 So. 2d 756 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- State v. Margarita Varela and the Division of Workers' Compensation, 418 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)