JOSE LUIS HERNANDEZ
v.
HIALEAH SOLID WASTE DEPT. AND SEDGWICK CMS
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.
An employer cannot restrict an authorized treating physician's performance of authorized treatment without satisfying the statutory requirements of section 440.13(2)(d), which requires an independent medical examination showing lack of appropriate progress.
[1] An employer seeking to restrict an authorized treating physician from performing authorized treatment must comply with Fla. …
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“a refusal 'amount[ing] to a de facto deauthorization of the doctor.'”
The court's characterization of the employer's conduct in restricting the treating physician's authority to perform authorized treatments.
Hernandez was prescribed spinal-injection treatments by his treating physician, and his employer authorized the treatment but refused to allow Hernand…
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 Independent Medical Examination cases and more on FLexlaw
February 20, 2018 PER CURIAM.
Jose Luis Hernandez, a workers’ compensation claimant, was prescribed certain spinal-injection treatments. His employer authorized the treatment, but insisted that another physician— not Hernandez’s treating physician—perform them. The Judge of Compensation Claims sided with the employer, and Hernandez appeals.
Section 440.13(2)(d) allows the employer “to transfer the care of an injured employee from the attending health care provider if an independent medical examination determines that the employee is not making appropriate progress in recuperation.” Here, the employer did not satisfy the statute’s requirements. Instead, the employer refused to allow Hernandez’s authorized physician to perform authorized treatments, a refusal “amount[ing] to a de facto deauthorization of the doctor.” Williams v. Triple J Enters., 650 So. 2d 1114, 1116 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).
REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.
B.L. THOMAS, C.J., and OSTERHAUS and WINSOR, JJ., concur. _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
_____________________________ Mark L. Zientz of Law Offices of Mark L. Zientz, P.A., Miami, for Appellant. Eduardo E. Neret of Neret, Finlay & Nguyen, LLP, Miami, for Appellees.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Marine Max, Inc. v. Blair, 268 So. 3d 839 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)
Authorities Cited
- Emerson Williams v. Triple J Enters. & Erc, Inc., 650 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)