HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD AND RSKCO, APPELLANTS/CROSS-APPELLEES,
v.
SUE CHRISTOPHER, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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.
The court affirmed the award of permanent total disability benefits to an employee based on her back condition, but reversed and remanded to recalculate benefits using her average weekly wage at the time she became disabled (1995) rather than at the time of injury (1988).
Permanent total disability benefits must be calculated based on the employee's average weekly wage at the time she became disabled, not at the time of the initial injury.
[1] In workers' compensation cases, permanent total disability benefits are calculated using the employee's average weekly wage as of the date the employee became disabled, n…
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 intelligence“the commencement of disability is the pertinent time for AWW determination”
Court cited Cote v. Combustion Eng'g, Inc. to establish the standard for when average weekly wage should be calculated
Sue Christopher suffered a back injury on July 25, 1988, while employed by Hillsborough County School Board and RSKCo. Her condition deteriorated over…
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 Average Weekly Wage Determination cases and more on FLexlaw
ERVIN, J.
Hillsborough County School Board and RSKCo. (hereinafter “the E/C”), assert four issues on appeal challenging various aspects of an order awarding permanent, total disability (PTD) benefits to claimant, Sue Christopher. Because the record contains competent, substantial evidence to support the judge of compensation claims’ (JCC) ruling that claimant is permanently and totally disabled as a result of her back condition alone, we affirm all issues raised by the E/C.
On cross-appeal, claimant argues that the JCC erred by directing that her PTD benefits be calculated based upon her average weekly wage (AWW) in effect on July 25, 1988, when she suffered her back injury, rather than on April 20, 1995, when she became disabled because her condition had deteriorated to the point that she could no longer work. We agree. See Cote v. Combustion Eng’g, Inc., 502 So. 2d 500 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) (the commencement of disability is the pertinent time for AWW determination); Reynolds v. Neisner Bros., Inc., 436 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (JCC erroneously calculated AWW at time of 1977 accident, rather than at time of disability in 1981). We therefore reverse and remand for recalculation of claimant’s PTD benefits based upon the stipulated 1995 AWW.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
WEBSTER and BENTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Michels v. Orange Cnty. Fire/Rescue & Johns E. Co., Inc., 819 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…Sledge v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 497 So. 2d 1231, 1233 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) (holding disablement occurs when the employee is actually incapacitated, partially or totally from performing his employment); Hillsborough County Sch. Bd. v. Christopher, 790 So. 2d 1267, 1268 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (holding disability commences upon the date a claimant’s condition deteriorates to the point he can no longer work). Accordingly, detection of an occupational disease does not necessarily coincide with the date of disableme…
-
James v. Armstrong World Indus., Inc., 864 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…n section 440.14(l)(a) cannot fairly and reasonably be applied. In asserting that his “date of accident” should be April 18, 2000, because it is the date he became “disabled,” the appellant relies on Hillsborough County School Board v. Christopher, 790 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). The relevant portion of the decision in Christopher is as follows: On cross-appeal, claimant argues that the JCC erred by directing that her PTD benefits be calculated based upon her average weekly wage (AWW) in effect on July…1 / 2
-
Karnes v. City OF Boca Raton, 858 So. 2d 1264 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…enefits. Claimant argued he was entitled to a recalculated AWW based on his most recent 13 weeks of compensation prior to his current disability. Claimant based his argument on this court’s decision in Hillsborough County School Bd. v. Christopher, 790 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). Claimant maintained that Christopher mandated that AWW benefits be calculated from the time of disability, not the time of the original injury. Claimant misconstrues Christopher. It is well settled that, in non-occupational dis…
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
- Valletto v. Dupree, 436 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
- Cote v. Combustion Eng'g, Inc., 502 So. 2d 500 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)