BECK HOSPITALITY AND FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
DUKE GARDNER, 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.
Beck Hospitality and Fireman's Fund Insurance Company appealed a workers' compensation order awarding temporary partial disability (TPD) benefits to an injured worker. The court affirmed the award of TPD benefits for medical restrictions and successful job search efforts, but reversed the award of interest because it accrues only when benefits become due upon filing of forms.
The court affirmed the award of TPD benefits for 20 hours per week for the entire period based on competent, substantial medical evidence, and affirmed additional TPD benefits for periods with filed TPD and job search forms. However, the court reversed the award of interest because interest does not accrue until benefits become due upon filing of forms.
[1] A workers' compensation claimant may receive temporary partial disability benefits for a period of medically restricted part-time employment if competent, substantial med…
[2] A workers' compensation claimant may receive additional temporary partial disability benefits for periods in which job search forms are submitted, provided there is compe…
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“claimant presented competent, substantial medical evidence proving his entitlement to those benefits. The record shows that he was able to work full-time prior to his industrial injury, and that after his accident his doctors restricted him to part-time employment of only 20 hours per week based on his compensable injuries.”
Establishes the factual and evidentiary basis for affirming the award of TPD benefits for 20 hours per week.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe claimant was able to work full-time prior to his industrial injury. After the accident, his doctors restricted him to part-time employment of only…
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 Industrial Injury cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We withdraw this court’s previous opinion filed on May 27, 1997, and substitute the following, which we have clarified. Appellants’ motion for rehearing and clarification is otherwise denied.
We affirm the workers’ compensation order awarding temporary partial disability (TPD) benefits from January 1, 1994, through August 22, 1995, to the extent it awards benefits for 20 hours of work per week for this entire period, because claimant presented competent, substantial medical evidence proving his entitlement to those benefits. The record shows that he was able to work full-time prior to his industrial injury, and that after his accident his doctors restricted him to part-time employment of only 20 hours per week based on his compensable injuries.
We also affirm the award of additional TPD benefits for those periods in which claimant submitted TPD and job search forms. There is competent, substantial evidence which supports a finding that claimant proved additional entitlement to TPD benefits over and above the 20 hours for which he was medically restricted during these periods by conducting a good-faith, but unsuccessful, job search.
We affirm as well the order to the extent it allows claimant to file TPD forms for the 20 hours he was medically restricted and to amend those forms which were filed to include his earnings throughout this period. See Southern Linen Supply v. Azinger, 528 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); AC. Elec. Co. v. Kwitchen, 525 So. 2d 993 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Old Cove Condo v. Curry, 511 So. 2d 666 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Morris v. Metal Indus., 491 So. 2d 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Bay Steel Erections v. Chung, 458 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).
We reverse the award of interest on the TPD benefits through the date of the April 5, 1996, order, however, because it is undisputed that interest does not begin to accrue until the benefits become due under section 440.20(9), Florida Statutes (1991), and the benefits in this case are not due until the forms are filed.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part and REMANDED.
ERVIN, DAVIS and BENTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dollar Gen. & Dollar Gen. Corp. v. McCOY, 927 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…so erred in denying interest on the past due benefits, which ordinarily is awarded pursuant to section 440.20(8), in addition to other penalties for late payment of compensation. In denying interest, the judge misapplied Beck Hospitality v. Gardner, 696 So. 2d 961 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), the facts of which are distinguishable from those in this case. Accordingly, we remand to the judge of compensation claims with directions to grant claimant’s request for penalties and interest on the indemnity benefits awarded…
Authorities Cited
- Morris v. Metal Indus., 491 So. 2d 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- The OLD Cove Condo & W. Am. Ins. Co. v. Curry, 511 So. 2d 666 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
- BAY Steel Erections & United States Fid. & Guar. v. Andrew Chung and the Division of Workers' Compensation, 458 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- S. Linen Supply & Fred S. James & Co. of Fla., Inc. v. Azinger, 528 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
- Drawdy v. State, 525 So. 2d 993 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
- A.C. Elec. Co. & Feisco v. Kwitchen, 525 So. 2d 993 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)