DANNY THAMES, APPELLANT,
v.
SANTA ROSA COUNTY JAIL, 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.
A mental or nervous injury is not compensable if it is solely due to fright or excitement, even if a physical injury occurred, unless the physical injury was a causative factor of the mental injury.
[1] A mental or nervous injury resulting solely from fright or excitement is not an injury by accident arising out of employment.
[2] The statutory exclusion for mental or nervous injuries caused by fright or excitement is not avoided when the precipitating incident also involves a physical injury, if t…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA correctional officer injured his back colliding with a mailbox, subsequently developing psychiatric problems. The claimant's psychiatrist attributed…
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 Causation cases and more on FLexlaw
ALLEN, Judge.
The claimant appeals a workers’ compensation order denying a claim for benefits relating to a mental or nervous injury. We conclude that this claim was properly denied in accordance with section 440.02(1), Florida Statutes, as applied in City of Holmes Beach v. Grace, 598 So. 2d 71 (Fla.1992).
The claimant was working as a correctional officer when he unexpectedly collided with a mailbox, injuring his back. The claimant immediately thought he was being attacked from behind by an inmate, but then realized what had happened. He began having psychiatric problems after this incident.
Section 440.02(1) provides that a “mental or nervous injury due to fright or excitement only ... shall be deemed not to be an injury by accident arising out of the employment.” The claimant contends that his psychiatric problems are not due to fright or excitement only, because the precipitating incident also involved physical injury. However, the claimant’s psychiatrist attributed the claimant’s problems to anxiety and fear associated with his misapprehension of the incident, and indicated that the situation would be unchanged even if the claimant had sustained no physical injury.
In Holmes Beach the supreme court ruled that section 440.02(1) precludes compensability for mental or nervous injuries unless an underlying physical injury is a causative factor. Holmes Beach explains that absent such causation, the mental or nervous injury would result from only a mental stimulus. The statutory exclusion is thus not avoided merely upon an incident which involves physical injury, where the physical injury is not a cause of the mental or nervous injury. See City of Miami Beach v. Morantes, 633 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994).
Based on the evidence presented, the judge was entitled to find that the claimant’s back injury was not a cause of his psychiatric problems. Because this mental or nervous injury was due to fright or excitement only, the claim was properly denied. The appealed order is therefore affirmed.
BARFIELD and WOLF, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Anderson v. Wales Indus. & Gallagher Bassett Servs., 688 So. 2d 379 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)…when a claimant had suffered physical injury, the psychological condition was not compensable if the medical evidence showed that it resulted from emotional or stress factors, rather than from the physical injuries. Thames v. Santa Rosa County Jail, 639 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); City of Miami Beach v. Morantes, 633 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Egan v. Florida Atl. Univ., 610 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). The JCC concluded that the medical evidence provided competent, substantial evidence for denyi…
-
Goodman v. BFI OF Fla., Inc., 755 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…his PTSD. Under section 440.02(1), Florida Statutes (1997), a psychological injury due to “stress, fright, or excitement only” is not compensable. See, e.g., City of Holmes Beach v. Grace, 598 So. 2d 71 (Fla.1992); Thames v. Santa Rosa County Jail, 639 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); City of Miami Beach v. Morantes, 633 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). We direct the JCC to determine on remand whether Goodman’s PTSD resulted from stress, fright, or excitement only, or whether it was increased or prolonged in a…
Authorities Cited
- City OF Holmes Beach v. Grace, 598 So. 2d 71 (Fla. 1992)
- Morris v. State, 633 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)