DORAL COUNTRY CLUB AND PROFESSIONAL ADMINISTRATORS, INC., APPELLANTS,
v.
LUIS GONZALEZ, 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 First District Court of Appeal affirmed an order awarding temporary partial disability benefits to an injured worker for three periods of reduced earnings. The court held that the worker's diminished earnings were causally connected to his industrial injury and that he was not voluntarily limiting his income.
The court affirmed the award of temporary partial disability benefits for all three periods. The claimant's diminished earnings while continuing to work for his former employer were directly caused by his industrial injury. The claimant did not voluntarily limit his income by accepting security guard work, as he obtained employment commensurate with his abilities given his physical limitations, language barrier, and job history. The deputy properly determined the claimant's earning capacity at $67 per week based on consideration of physical restrictions, language problems, age, education, and job history.
[1] Temporary partial disability benefits may be awarded for periods an employee continues to work for the employer at diminished post-injury earnings.
[2] An employee's earnings at a subsequent, lower-paying job may be considered for workers' compensation benefits when there is no evidence of refusal to accept other suitabl…
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“Medical testimony supports the deputy's conclusion that claimant's diminished earnings during the time he continued to work for his former employer were a direct result of claimant's industrial accident.”
Establishes the causal connection between the industrial injury and reduced earnings necessary to support temporary partial disability benefits.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceClaimant suffered an industrial accident that reduced his earning capacity. He continued working for his former employer at diminished post-injury ear…
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 Temporary Partial Disability Benefits cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal of a workers’ compensation order awarding claimant temporary partial disability benefits for three periods: 1) while claimant continued to work for the employer at diminished post-injury earnings; 2) while claimant worked as a security guard for 20 hours a week at $3.35 per hour; and 3) after claimant’s employment as a security guard lapsed and the deputy deemed his earnings at his prior security guard rate of pay, $3.35.
Medical testimony supports the deputy’s conclusion that claimant’s diminished earnings during the time he continued to work for his former employer were a direct result of claimant’s industrial accident. Additionally, during the time that claimant worked as a security guard, there was no showing that claimant refused to accept other employment. On the contrary, given claimant’s physical limitation, employment history, and inability to speak English, claimant appears to have obtained work commensurate with his abilities.
Section 440.15(3)(b)2 states: “In the event the employee voluntarily limits his income ... the salary ... the employee is able to earn ... shall be the amount which would have been earned if the employee did not limit his income.” The deputy found claimant’s work search to be marginal and also found claimant’s compensable injury had limited his ability to earn wages during the last period of time to $67 per week. This second finding was based on the deputy’s consideration of physical restrictions, language problems, age, education, and job history. Hillsborough County Employees v. Tamargo, 477 So. 2d 652 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985).
We therefore affirm wage loss benefits for the three periods of time in question, and find no error with respect to the other issues raised by appellant.
Affirmed.
BOOTH, C.J., and MILLS and WENT-WORTH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- King v. State, 477 So. 2d 652 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
- Hillsborough Cnty. Emps. Credit Union & Cumis Ins. Co. v. Tamargo, 477 So. 2d 652 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)