PASTORA RODRIGUEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
MIAMI BAKING COMPANY, INC., EMPLOYERS INSURANCE OF WAUSAU, A MUTUAL COMPANY, AND THE DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION OF THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, APPELLEES

Fla. 1st DCA | 1983-04-27
No. AN-132
JOANOS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
430 So. 2d 955 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1983) Positive Treatment
Cited by 8 cases

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.

Synopsis

Rodriguez appeals denial of temporary total disability (TTD) and permanent total disability (PTD) benefits following a work-related back injury. The appellate court affirmed the denial of most benefits but reversed the denial of TTD benefits for a brief hospitalization period in February 1982.


Holding

The court affirmed the denial of TTD benefits from July 28, 1981 through January 31, 1982 and the denial of PTD/wage loss benefits following MMI, but reversed the denial of TTD benefits for the hospitalization period from February 1, 1982 through February 12, 1982 due to unrebutted testimony of hospitalization during this period.


Headnotes

[1] A deputy commissioner's order is sufficient if it sets forth the nature of the accident and injury, the treatment provided, the benefits sought, and the reasons for denia…

[2] A claimant's receipt of return-to-work slips from physicians during a period of claimed temporary total disability may support a denial of benefits for that period.

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

Key Quotes

“Although she was allowed to return to work by her physician on 29 August, she was hospitalized on 3 September 1979 and never returned to work after that date.”

Establishes the compensable nature of the injury and baseline for benefit eligibility

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Rodriguez suffered a compensable back injury on August 26, 1979 while lifting and slipping at work. Although initially cleared to return to work on Au…

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.


Opinion of the Court
MILLS, Judge.

MILLS, Judge.

Rodriguez appeals the deputy commissioner’s order denying her claim for temporary total disability (TTD) benefits and for permanent total disability (PTD) or wage loss benefits following the date of maximum medical improvement (MMI). We affirm in part and reverse in part.

Rodriguez suffered a compensable injury to her back on 26 August 1979 when, while lifting a heavy object, she slipped and fell, landing in a sitting position on a wooden floor. Although she was allowed to return to work by her physician on 29 August, she was hospitalized on 3 September 1979 and never returned to work after that date. Except for a brief hiatus not pertinent to this appeal, TTD benefits were paid from 3 September 1979 through 28 July 1981.

On 22 July 1980, Rodriguez came under the care of Dr. Alzugaray. He continued to treat her until 12 February 1982, which he later testified was the date of MMI. He further testified that Rodriguez had seen only minimal improvement and that she was unable to work during the entire time he treated her. At the hearing, the employer/carrier introduced for impeachment purposes a slip signed by Dr. Alzugaray and dated 18 March 1981 allowing Rodriguez to return to work. Rodriguez admitted that she had received three return-to-work slips from three different physicians in February 1981, March 1981, and June 1981.

The deputy commissioner also received into evidence videotapes showing Rodriguez’ activities on 20 July 1981, 23 July 1981, and 8 April 1982. At various times on these dates, she was seen lifting cases of soft drinks, bending, and aiding customers at bakeries owned by her brothers. Further, Rodriguez testified that she had sought work at only two places during the time since her accident.

After hearing the evidence, the deputy commissioner denied TTD benefits for the period from 28 July 1981 to 12 February 1982, and further deniecl PTD or wage loss benefits for the period following 12 February 1982.

On appeal, Rodriguez first contends that the deputy commissioner failed to make adequate findings of fact. Having examined the order, we find this contention to be without merit. The order here sets forth both the nature of the accident and the injury, the treatment provided in the past and that presently being provided, the type of benefits sought, and the reasons for denial of those benefits. These findings are sufficient. Mobley v. Fulford Van & Storage, 390 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980).

Rodriguez next asserts that the deputy commissioner erred in failing to award TTD benefits from 28 July 1981 through 12 February 1982. We disagree. Rodriguez admitted that she had received three return-to-work slips during this purported period of disability. Further, based on his observations of the videotapes showing Rodriguez’ activities on 20 July 1981 and 23 July 1981, the deputy commissioner could have concluded that she was no longer temporarily totally disabled beginning on 28 July 1981. We note, however, that there was unre-butted testimony showing that Rodriguez was hospitalized due to her injury from 1 February 1982 to 12 February 1982. Therefore, the deputy commissioner did err in failing to award TTD benefits for this brief period, and we reverse that portion of the order. Finally, contrary to Rodriguez’ contentions, there was no error in denying PTD or wage loss benefits following the date of MMI. The deputy commissioner was entitled to conclude from the videotape of 8 April 1982 that Rodriguez was not disabled, and wage loss benefits were properly denied due to a totally inadequate job search.

Accordingly, we affirm all portions of the order except that portion denying TTD benefits for the period from 1 February 1982 to 12 February 1982.

JOANOS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Allman v. Meredith Corp. & Md. Cas. Co., 451 So. 2d 957 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
    …plaints, that claimant was unable to engage in any gainful employment from March of 1979 to the date of his deposition in February of 1983, since the deputy was able to view films contrary to Dr. Kreider’s opinion. See Rodriguez v. Miami Baking Co., 430 So. 2d 955 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). However, claimant’s abnormal disc condition at C6-7 vertebra level, and the etilogy for the same based on an examination of claimant, previous myelograms, and prior medical records, are not matters readily susceptible to determi…
  • Atkins v. Greenhut Constr. Co., 447 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
    …40.28. Where there is unrebutted testimony that claimant has been hospitalized after MMI, due to a compensable injury, it is error to deny TTD benefits at least for the hospitalization period. Pastora Rodriguez v. Miami Baking Company, Inc., et al, 430 So. 2d 955 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). Further, TTD benefits for a period of recuperation following a curative surgical procedure necessitated by a compensable injury are properly awardable, Smitty’s Coffee Shop v. Florida Industrial Commission, 86 So. 2d 268 (Fla.19…
  • …Dr. Montoya, in order to undergo myelogram and other testing from November 29, 1982, until December 6, 1982, and during her recuperative period thereafter, up until Dr. Montoya found MMI on January 17, 1983. Rodriguez v. Miami Baking Company, Inc., 430 So. 2d 955 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). This is true even though we accept, as supported by competent, substantial evidence, the deputy’s finding that claimant reached MMI by March 1, 1982, since the claimant is entitled even after MMI to TTD benefits for a period of…

Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw