HIT PROMOTIONAL PRODUCTS INC. AND VIGILANT INSURANCE COMPANY C/O CHUBB GROUP OF INS. CORP., APPELLANTS,
v.
SAKIBA KRIVDIC, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Compensable Injury cases and more on FLexlaw
In this workers’ compensation appeal, the Employer/Carrier (E/C) challenges the Judge of Compensation Claims’ (JCC’s) award of a $2,000 advance to Claimant. We affirm the award of the advance because competent substantial evidence supports the JCC’s finding that Claimant has been unable to return to the same or equivalent employment, one of the three alternative statutory requisites for an award of an advance of $2,000 or less. See § 440.20(12)(c), Fla. Stat. (2010).
The E/C also argues that the JCC made a de facto finding that Claimant’s injuries were compensable. Because that issue was not before the JCC, we strike from the order the phrase “work-related” in paragraph eight. See City of Venice v. Van Dyke, 46 So.3d 115, 116 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (striking findings addressing com-pensability of claimant’s hypertension because there was no pending claim for same).
The order is AFFIRMED as modified.
WOLF, RAY, and MAKAR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Shannon v. Cheney Bros. Inc. & The Travelers, 157 So. 3d 397 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)…CE Am. Ins. Co. v. Kuhn, 104 So. 3d 1111 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (reversing order awarding an advance); Worthy v. Jimmie Crowder Excavating, 100 So. 3d 727 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (affirming order denying an advance); HIT Promotional Prods. Inc. v. Krivdic, 84 So. 3d 1234 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (affirming order awarding an advance); Lopez v. Allied Aerofoam/Specialty Risk Servs., 48 So. 3d 888 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (reversing order denying an advance); Workers of Fla. v. Williams, 743 So. 2d 609 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (affir…
Authorities Cited
- City OF Venice & PGCS v. van Dyke, 46 So. 3d 115 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)