DONNIE G. SPAUGH, APPELLANT,
v.
MUNYAN PAINTING CONTRACTORS AND AUTO OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY, 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.
A workers' compensation claimant appealed a deputy commissioner's order denying permanent impairment benefits, arguing the deputy erred by refusing to consider medical testimony that did not conform to the American Medical Association's Guides. The court reversed on this issue, holding that for pre-August 1, 1979 accidents, AMA Guides compliance was not required to determine impairment ratings.
The court reversed the deputy's refusal to consider the medical testimony. For accidents occurring prior to August 1, 1979, anatomical impairment ratings do not need to comply with the AMA Guides, and medical testimony regarding impairment may be considered even if not expressed in AMA Guides format.
[1] An anatomical impairment rating is not required to be based on the AMA Guides for accidents occurring prior to August 1, 1979.
[2] Medical testimony may be considered to determine the degree of anatomical impairment for accidents occurring prior to August 1, 1979, even if the ratings are not expresse…
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“[QUOTE REDACTED — failed verbatim audit (paraphrase, not verbatim). See original_text for the text as originally displayed.]”
Establishes the core holding that medical testimony regarding impairment need not conform to AMA Guides for pre-1979 accidents
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDonnie G. Spaugh was injured in a workplace accident on November 23, 1977. Medical doctors provided testimony regarding his anatomical impairment but …
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 Anatomical Impairment Rating cases and more on FLexlaw
THOMPSON, Judge.
The claimant appeals a workers’ compensation order contending, inter alia, that the deputy commissioner (deputy) erred in concluding that because the doctors did not express their ratings in accordance with the American Medical Association’s Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (the AMA Guides) he could not consider their testimony to determine the amount of claimant’s anatomical impairment. We reverse as to this point'.
Based on the decisions of this court at the time of the hearing the deputy correctly concluded that an anatomical impairment rating must be based on the AMA Guides, even for accidents occurring prior to August 1,1979. However, in an en banc opinion decided subsequent to the hearing this court held the use of the AMA Guides was not required to determine the existence or degree of permanent impairment resulting from accidents occurring prior to August 1, 1979. Peck v. Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners, 442 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). Since the accident involved herein occurred on November 23, 1977, prior to the date § 440.15(3)(a) Fla.Stat. (1979) became law, the deputy erred in concluding that be cause the doctors did not express their ratings in accordance with the AMA Guides he could not determine the exact amount of claimant’s anatomical impairment. We therefore reverse on this point and remand for determination of claimant’s degree of anatomical impairment based on medical testimony without regard to the AMA Guides.
We find there is competent substantial evidence to support the deputy’s finding that claimant reached maximum medical improvement on May 4, 1981. There is also competent substantial evidence to support the deputy’s finding that claimant failed to conduct a good faith work search. Accordingly, these findings are affirmed. The issue raised by claimant concerning the deputy’s failure to award permanent total disability benefits based on loss of wage earning capacity is moot as a result of our disposition of the issue regarding the inadequate work search.
Reversed in part, affirmed in part, and remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
SHIVERS and JOANOS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Peck v. Palm Beach Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs, 442 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)