ALEX MAJOR, APPELLANT,
v.
LUSTINE CHEVROLET, INC., APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1985-07-09
No. 85-142
Before HUBBART, NESBITT and BAS-KIN, JJ.
474 So. 2d 293 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1985) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Henriquez v. Publix Super Markets, Inc., 434 So. 2d 53 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Central National Bank of Miami v. Muskat Corp. of America, 430 So. 2d 957 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • …ordinary household duties such as shopping and cooking, benefits for attendant care may be awarded. Extraordinary services include bathing, dressing, administering medicine, and assisting in sanitary functions. Perez v. Pennsuco Cement & Aggregates, 474 So. 2d 293, 295-96 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), review denied, 482 So. 2d 349 (Fla.1986). In the instant case, the JCC denied attendant care because Dr. Jaen, the only physician who testified on that issue, stated on cross-examination that such services would be “hel…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw