MCFARLANE, FERGUSON, ET AL. AND ATLANTIC MUTUAL COMPANIES, APPELLANTS,
v.
HAMILTON H. WHALEY, 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.
Affirmed permanent total disability award based on physical injuries alone, despite unresolved psychiatric condition, where competent substantial evidence supports the determination under the preponderance standard.
A permanent total disability award may be made based solely on physical injuries without regard to the status of unresolved psychiatric injuries, provided competent substantial evidence supports the award.
[1] Permanent total disability may be awarded based solely on physical injuries without regard to unresolved psychiatric condition when competent substantial evidence support…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe claimant sustained both physical and psychiatric injuries in a work-related incident. The claimant achieved maximum medical improvement on a physi…
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 Permanent Total Disability Benefits cases and more on FLexlaw
ALLEN, Judge.
The employer/carrier appeal a workers’ compensation order awarding permanent total disability benefits. The claimant sustained both physical and psychiatric injuries, and the evidence did not establish maximum medical improvement on a psychiatric basis. However, the claimant had attained maximum medical improvement on a physical basis, and the permanent total award was predicated solely on the claimant’s physical injuries. In these circumstances a permanent total award may be made without regard to the status of the claimant’s psychiatric condition. See Crews v. Hussman Refrig., 616 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Amfesco Duramil Division v. Guzman, 596 So. 2d 732 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); John Barley Memorial v. Gillam, 550 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).
The employer/carrier contend that the cited cases require clear evidence in these circumstances, and allude to a clear and convincing standard of proof. Although Amfesco and John Barley refer to a clear showing of permanent total disability on a physical basis, they do not mandate an enhanced burden of proof. Rather, Amfesco upheld such an award because it was supported by competent substantial evidence. As in Crews, Amfesco, and John Barley, it is clear from the present record that the award was based solely on the claimant’s physical injuries. There is competent substantial evidence to support the determination of permanent total disability, and the appealed order is therefore affirmed.
BOOTH and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Daws Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Ostoyic, 756 So. 2d 175 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…disorders. Where a psychiatric injury plays no part in a finding of a perma [*177] nent total disability, however, PTD benefits may not be rejected on the ground that a psychiatric condition has not been resolved. See McFarlane, Ferguson v. Whaley, 641 So. 2d 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), Crews v. Hussman Refrigeration, 616 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993), and John Barley Mem’l v. Gillam, 550 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). Here, Ostoyic argues that the award of PTD benefits can be sustained on the record evidenc…
-
Fla. Transp. 1982, Inc. v. Quintana, 1 So. 3d 388 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)…d 95, 98 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). In other words, a claimant can still prove entitlement to PTD before reaching overall MMI, if the claimant can prove he is PTD from one of his injuries standing alone. Id. at 100; see also McFarlane, Ferguson v. Whaley, 641 So. 2d 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (holding PTD award predicated solely on the claimant’s physical injuries would be affirmed despite the fact the claimant had not reached psychiatric MMI). Here, claimant had two medical conditions resulting from the April 2003 a…
-
Celestino Reyes v. Granite Constr. Co., 894 So. 2d 274 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…ntial evidence and that the JCC correctly applied the law to the facts, as found, we affirm the final order, subject to the construction of the denial of PTD benefits as referring solely to the physical standpoint. See McFarlane, Ferguson v. Whaley, 641 So. 2d 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (stating that where claimant has attained MMI physically, but not psychiatrically, a PTD award may be predicated solely on physical injuries). AFFIRMED, with a clarification. DAVIS and HAWKES, JJ., CONCUR.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- John Barley Mem'l & Aetna Life & Cas. Co. v. Gillam, 550 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Amfesco Duramil Division v. Pastor Guzman, 596 So. 2d 732 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
- Crews v. Hussman Refrigeration & Crawford & Co., 616 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)