ORANGE COUNTY AND ALTERNATIVE SERVICE CONCEPTS, APPELLANTS,
v.
LAVONDA WILDER, 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.
The court affirmed the award of workers' compensation benefits for viral cardiomyopathy under the statutory presumption of occupational causation in section 112.18, Florida Statutes, holding that the employer failed to rebut the presumption by proving the virus was not contracted at work.
Once the statutory presumption of occupational causation applies to heart disease under section 112.18, the employer bears the burden to prove the disease was not occupationally caused, and the claimant need not redundantly prove occupational causation beyond what triggered the presumption.
[1] Under section 112.18, Florida Statutes, once the statutory presumption of occupational causation for heart disease is established, the claimant need not prove occupationa…
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“If the presumption applies, the claimant is under no obligation to establish occupational causation redundantly by adducing evidence beyond what was necessary to give rise to the presumption in the first place.... The State had the burden to prove he did not get the virus at work, and failed to carry its burden.”
Court explaining the burden of proof once the statutory presumption of occupational causation is triggered under section 112.18.
Lavonda Wilder, a claimant, suffered from viral cardiomyopathy and sought workers' compensation benefits. The employer and carrier acknowledged that W…
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 Presumption Of Occupational Causation cases and more on FLexlaw
In this workers’ compensation appeal, Orange County and Alternative Service Concepts, the Employer/Carrier (E/C), challenge an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) awarding Claimant, Lavonda Wilder, appellee, benefits for her heart disease based upon the presumption of occupational causation available in section 112.18, Florida Statutes (2010). The E/C acknowledges that Claimant met the prerequisites of proof for application of the presumption, including that her viral cardiomyopathy constitutes “heart disease” as that term is used in section 112.18. The E/C argues, however, that the *481JCC erred in failing to rule that the E/C had rebutted the statutory presumption by proving the cause of the cardiomyopathy was a virus. In the order under review, the JCC found that the E/C bore, but failed to meet, the burden of proving Claimant’s employment was not the cause of the viral cardiomyopathy. As this court recently held in Walters v. State of Florida—DOC/Division of Risk Management, 100 So.3d 1173, (Fla. 1st DCA 2012), another case involving viral cardiomyopathy, “[i]f the presumption applies, the claimant is under no obligation to establish occupational causation redundantly by adducing evidence beyond what was necessary to give rise to the presumption in the first place.... The State had the burden to prove he did not get the virus at work, and failed to carry its burden.” Here, the JCC correctly applied the law consistent with Walters and competent substantial evidence supports the JCC’s finding that the E/C failed to meet its burden of proof.
AFFIRMED.
WOLF, VAN NORTWICK, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Seminole Cnty. v. Braden, 378 So. 3d 637 (Fla. 1st DCA 2023)
Authorities Cited
- Walters v. State of Florida-DOC/Division OF Risk Mgmt., 100 So. 3d 1173 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)