CHARLES J. GIVENS ORGANIZATION, APPELLANT,
v.
DANNY J. MORRIS, 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 court affirmed the finding that the employee's injury was compensable but reversed and remanded the calculation of average weekly wage and the award of temporary total disability benefits, which were erroneous under Florida law.
The court affirmed the finding of compensability as supported by competent substantial evidence but reversed the average weekly wage calculation and temporary total disability award because the employee received full pay through December 15, 1993, and part-time compensation thereafter, making him ineligible for TTD benefits during those periods and entitling the employer to an offset for actual pay received.
[1] A finding of compensability in a workers' compensation case will be affirmed if supported by competent substantial evidence.
[2] The calculation of average weekly wage (AWW) in a workers' compensation case must adhere to statutory provisions, such as section 440.14(1)(a), Florida Statutes, when an…
Previewing 2 of 6 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 finding of compensability is supported by competent substantial evidence and we affirm”
The court's holding on the threshold issue of compensability, which was upheld as meeting the substantial evidence standard.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCharles J. Givens Organization employed Morris, who was injured on July 26, 1993. Morris received full pay from the employer from the date of the acci…
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 Compensability cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this workers’ compensation ease, the finding of compensability is supported by competent substantial evidence and we affirm. The computation of average weekly wage (AWW) and the award of temporary total disability (TTD) are in error, however, and we must reverse.
The record before us suggests, contrary to the understanding of the parties and the judge of compensation claims (JCC), that appellee worked for substantially all of the 13 weeks before his injury and, accordingly, section 440.14(l)(a), Florida Statutes, would apply to the calculation of claimant’s AWW. In the event our understanding of the record is incorrect, the JCC may utilize another appropriate method to calculate AWW, but she should apprise the parties of the method chosen.
The JCC’s award of TTD benefits “beginning July 26, 1993” is, in part, erroneous. From the date of the accident, July 26, 1993, through December 15, 1993, Morris received full pay from appellant. Thus, the JCC erred in retroactively awarding TTD benefits for this period. See The Oaks v. Paulk, 557 So. 2d 219, 220 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).* From December 16, 1993, through December 31, 1993, Morris worked part time and appellant compensated him for his work. Accordingly, he was not entitled to TTD benefits for this period either. See Publix Supermarkets, Inc. v. Simpson, 478 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). In addition, because Morris testified that he returned to work on February 22,1994, the JCC erred in awarding TTD benefits after that date. On remand, the JCC may consider Morris’ entitlement to temporary partial disability benefits for the period from December 16 through December 31, 1993, and should also specifically address Morris’ employment status and eligibility for benefits after February 22, 1994. Finally, for any period in which benefits are due, appellant will be entitled to an offset for the amount of pay Morris actually received.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
BARFIELD and KAHN, JJ., and SHIVERS, Senior Judge, concur. *
Although not acknowledged by the parties, Morris’ receipt of full pay would have, in any event, resulted in a zero AWW. § 440.14(2), Fla. Stat. (1993).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Publix Supermarkets, Inc. v. Simpson, 478 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- THE Oaks & Cigna Prop. & Cas. v. Paulk, 557 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)