MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, F/K/A METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, APPELLANT,
v.
AUTHERIA MITCHELL, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed the workers' compensation award for medical services provided by Dr. Abeckjerr prior to February 14, 1997, because the doctor failed to comply with statutory requirements under section 440.13, and remanded the future medical care issue for reconsideration under the "major contributing cause" standard.
An employer is not required to pay for medical services provided by a doctor who fails to comply with the statutory requirements of section 440.13(3)(a) and (4)(a), Florida Statutes, even if the trial court excuses such non-compliance.
[1] An employer need not pay for medical services provided by a physician who fails to comply with the statutory notice and authorization requirements of section 440.13(3)(a)…
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 intelligenceA self-insured employer (Miami-Dade County) appealed a workers' compensation order requiring it to pay for medical services provided by Dr. Abeckjerr …
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 Workers' Compensation Claim For Medical Benefits cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this workers’ compensation case, the self-insured employer appeals, and the claimant cross-appeals. Having carefully considered the plethora of issues raised, we reverse that portion of the order which directs the employer to pay for medical services provided by Dr. Abeckjerr from the date of the accident until February 14, 1997, because we conclude that it was an abuse of discretion to excuse the doctor’s failure to comply with the requirements of section 440.13(3)(a) and (4)(a), Florida Statutes (1995). (Section 440.13(2)(c) provides authority for that portion of the order which directs the employer to pay for services provided by the doctor from February 14, 1997, to the date of maximum medical improvement.) We also reverse that portion of the order which directs the employer to pay for future medical care, and remand for further consideration of whether the November 11, 1995, accident was the “major contributing cause” of the need for future treatment, in light of our recent decision in Closet Maid v. Sykes, 25 Fla. L. Weekly D459, — So. 2d -, 2000 WL 155878 (Fla. 1st DCA Feb. 15, 2000) (en banc). In all other respects, we affirm.
Affirmed in part; reversed IN PART; and REMANDED, with directions.
KAHN,-WEBSTER and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Autheria Mitchell v. Metro Dade & Risk Mgmt. for Dade Co., 797 So. 2d 10 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)…PER CURIAM When this case was last before us, we remanded for reconsideration in light of Closet Maid v. Sykes, 763 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (en banc). See Miami-Dade County v. Mitchell, 754 So. 2d 773, 774 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). On remand, a successor judge of compensation claims reviewed the written record and entered the order now under review. Claimant contends that she should have been allowed to testify in person before the judge of compensati…
-
Miami-Dade Cnty. v. Autheria Mitchell, 835 So. 2d 1196 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…PER CURIAM. This case has been before this court twice before. See Miami-Dade County v. Mitchell, 754 So. 2d 773, 774 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (remanding for reconsideration in light of Closet Maid v. Sykes, 763 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)(en banc), to determine whether the workplace accident was the major contributing cause of the claimant’s need for future med…
Authorities Cited
- Closet Maid & Crawford & Co. v. Sykes, 763 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)