HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD/BROADSPIRE, APPELLANTS,
v.
JOHN E. KUBIK, 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 held that the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) erred in excluding an expert medical advisor's (EMA) opinion on causation and in denying temporary total disability (TTD) benefits based on that EMA's opinion.
[1] An expert medical advisor's opinion on causation is admissible, but not presumptively correct, when it extends beyond the scope of the inquiry.
[2] A claimant may rely on an authorized treating provider's instruction to refrain from working to support a claim for temporary total disability benefits.
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 intelligenceThe JCC excluded an EMA's opinion on the causation of the need for treatment and relied on the EMA to deny TTD benefits, despite the claimant's author…
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 Temporary Total Disability Benefits cases and more on FLexlaw
In this workers’ compensation appeal, we reverse one of the three issues presented on direct appeal, and one of the three issues presented in the cross-appeal. We affirm the remaining issues without further comment.
In the challenged order, the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) excluded the opinion of the expert medical advisor (EMA) about causation of the need for treatment of Claimant’s neck. On appeal, the Employer/Carrier argues that the JCC should instead have admitted the opinion into evidence without attributing to it the presumption of correctness prescribed in subsection 440.13(9), Florida Statutes. We agree. Lowe’s Home Ctrs., Inc. v. Beekman, 187 So.3d 318 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (holding EMA’s opinion beyond scope of inquiry was admissible but not presumptively correct). The error was not harmless because the JCC’s perception that a preexisting condition’s worsening could not create a break in the causal chain was formed without the benefit of Certistaff, Inc. v. Owen, 181 So.3d 1218 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).
Also in this order, the JCC relied on the EMA to deny temporary total dis*1288ability (TTD) benefits, despite evidence that Claimant’s authorized treating provider had taken him off work entirely and never informed him that he could return to work. On cross-appeal, Claimant argues that the JCC should instead have relied on case law holding that an injured worker can rely on an authorized treating provider’s instruction to refrain from working, “even assuming retrospective testimony that claimant could have worked during this period.” Charles v. Suwannee Swifty, 622 So.2d 114, 115 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). We agree with Claimant that his reliance on his doctor’s instruction can support a TTD claim.
For the foregoing reasons, the case is remanded for reconsideration of the causation question given the admissible evidence, and for findings on the appropriate time period for the TTD award to which Claimant is entitled.
AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED.
LEWIS, BILBREY, and WINOKUR, JJ„ CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Charles v. Suwannee Swifty and Associated Risk, 622 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)
- Lowe's Home Ctrs., Inc. v. Beekman, 187 So. 3d 318 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)
- Certistaff v. Owen, 181 So. 3d 1218 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)