TROY AZELL BARNES, APPELLANT,
v.
PCH WALTER T. PARKER AND UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY 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.
In a workers' compensation case, the court affirmed the denial of wage loss benefits due to an inadequate work search, but disapproved the deputy's suggestion that an employer-carrier's duty to inform an injured claimant of available benefits is diminished by the claimant's representation by counsel. The court reaffirmed that the workers' compensation system is primarily employer-carrier monitored and that these duties continue regardless of adversarial characterization or legal representation.
The court affirmed the denial of wage loss benefits because competent substantial evidence supported the finding of inadequate work search. However, the court disapproved the deputy's implication that the employer-carrier's duty to inform claimants of benefits or actively place benefits in the claimant's hands is lessened by legal representation, as the workers' compensation system is fundamentally an employer-carrier monitored system rather than claimant-attorney monitored.
[1] A deputy's denial of wage loss benefits is supported by competent substantial evidence if the claimant's work search was inadequate.
[2] An employer-carrier's duty to inform an injured claimant of available workers' compensation benefits is not diminished by the claimant's representation by an attorney.
Previewing 2 of 5 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 1979 Workers' Compensation Act — in its day-to-day operation is intended to be — beyond all else — quintessential^ an employer-carrier monitored system, rather than a claimant-attorney monitored system.”
Establishes the foundational principle that workers' compensation is primarily an employer-carrier monitored system, not dependent on claimant-attorney involvement.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAn injured worker (Barnes) applied for wage loss benefits under Florida's workers' compensation system. The employer-carrier denied the claim, finding…
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 Work Search Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
SMITH, Judge.
We affirm the deputy’s denial of appellant’s claim for wage loss benefits, since competent substantial evidence supports the deputy’s finding that appellant’s work search was inadequate, Walton v. Alco Distributors, Inc., 434 So. 2d 60 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). However, we disapprove the deputy’s order to the extent that it implies1 that the duty of informing an in jured claimant of the benefits available to him under the workers’ compensation law, or the E/C’s duty actively to pursue the obligation “to place needed benefits in the hands of the injured worker”2 is somehow lessened or diminished by the fact that an injured claimant is represented by an attorney.
The 1979 Workers’ Compensation Act — in its day-to-day operation is intended to be — beyond all else — quintessential^ an employer-carrier monitored system, rather than a claimant-attorney monitored system. This principle has found application in prior cases from this court, as very recently in Massaro v. Columbian Apartments, 457 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), in which we found to be without merit the E/C’s contention that they were entitled to ignore the request for alternative medical care of a claimant who was represented by counsel. Earlier, in Holiday Care Center v. Scriven, 418 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), this court alluded to the “centrality” of the work search requirement, and pointed out that as the injured worker progresses from inability to ability to work, the E/C’s obligation to pay benefits continues, and “will be monitored by contact with the searching worker.” Id. at 325.3 In the same case, we also noted that the E/C’s affirmative obligations under Chapter 440, as interpreted in Florida Erection Services, supra, do not terminate upon the E/C’s initial denial or termination of benefits, “nor when the matter takes on adversarial characteris-tics_” Id. at 327.
AFFIRMED as modified.
BOOTH and THOMPSON, JJ., concur. . The section of the deputy’s order containing the language we disapprove appears below:
11. The Claimant also argues that the E/C’s letter of October 28, 1982, advising the Claimant of his right to apply for wage-loss benefits, did not inform the Claimant of the necessity of a work search as it well should have done. The Claimant further contends that had he gotten such a letter when his social security was terminated in April of 1982, he would have at least known about the work-search requirement as soon as his first request for wage-loss benefits was turned down for lack of evidence of such a search.... this entire matter always returns to the same question — why wasn’t the Claimant advised of the work-search necessity? Why did it take eight months for the first request for wage-loss forms to be filed? Whatever the answers are, it is not the responsibility of the E/C to actively pursue an injured employee’s claim when he is represented by counsel.... (emphasis supplied)
. Florida Erection Services, Inc. v. McDonald, 395 So. 2d 203, 211 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).
. Cf. Gall Silica Mining Co. v. Sheffield, 401 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981) (claimant not precluded from recovering wage-loss benefits for failure to timely file a request for such benefits where E/C did not inform claimant of the statutory time limits; absence of workers’ compensation division rule specifically requiring comprehensively informative notice immaterial in view of self-executing workers’ compensation law).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Lucien COQ v. Fuchs Baking Co. & GAB Bus. Servs., 507 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…hat the claimant’s physician had advised claimant to seek employment, we are nonetheless guided by the principle that the worker’s compensation process is an employer/carrier-monitored system, not a doctor-monitored system. Cf. Barnes v. PCH Parker, 464 So. 2d 1298, 1299 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). (“Worker’s Compensation Act — in its day-to-day operation is intended to be — beyond all else — quintessential^ an employer-carrier monitored system, rather than a claimant-attorney monitored system.”) Moreover, even if t…
-
Morris v. Metal Indus., 491 So. 2d 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…relevant, as the “Workers’ Compensation Act — in its day-to-day operation is intended to be — beyond all else — quintessentially an employer-carrier monitored system, rather than a claimant-attorney monitored system.” Barnes v. PCH Walter T. Parker, 464 So. 2d 1298 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Accordingly, that portion of the order denying temporary partial disability benefits is REVERSED, and the cause is REMANDED to allow claimant to submit the proper wage-loss forms for the period November 30,1983, until she retu…
-
Rios v. Fred Teitelbaum Constr. & U.S. Fid. & Guar. Co., 522 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…s day-to-day operation is intended to be — beyond all else — quintessential^ an employer-carrier monitored system, rather than a claimant-attorney monitored system.” Morris v. Metal Industries, 491 So. 2d 312, quoting Barnes v. PCH Walter T. Parker, 464 So. 2d 1298 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Thus, in appropriate circumstances, full-time employment, “even in a self-owned business, may ... obviate the need for further work search during such employment.” Western Union Telegraph Company v. Perri, 508 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 1…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Fla. Erection Servs., Inc. v. Raymer McDONALD, 395 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- Holiday Care Ctr. v. Scriven, 418 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Jones v. State, 401 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- Lessie May Cooper v. State, 401 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- Massaro v. Columbian Apts. & Aetna Cas. & Sur., 457 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Walton v. Alco Distribs., Inc., 434 So. 2d 60 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
- Dugan v. Dugan, 434 So. 2d 60 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)