CITY OF GAINESVILLE AND CRAWFORD & COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
CHARLES H. HELTON, 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 Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a workers' compensation order that awarded temporary total disability benefits, medical care, and reimbursement for expenses. The court found insufficient evidence that the claimant had not reached maximum medical improvement and held that two medical opinions supported a finding that he had reached that plateau.
The court reversed the finding that the claimant had not reached maximum medical improvement and remanded for determination of the date of maximum medical improvement. The court reversed the award of temporary total disability benefits without prejudice to the claimant's right to seek permanent disability benefits. The court also reversed the awards of medical mileage reimbursement (absent evidence thereof) and reimbursement for outstanding medical and pharmaceutical expenses (due to lack of proper notice).
[1] An award of temporary total disability benefits is improper once a claimant has reached maximum medical improvement.
[2] Further remedial care is improper after the date of maximum medical improvement has been determined.
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 intelligence“Since there is no competent, substantial evidence of any reasonable expectation of improvement in claimant's condition and two doctors were of the opinion that claimant had reached maximum medical improvement before the hearing, we reverse and remand for a determination of the date of maximum medical improvement.”
Establishes the primary basis for reversal—lack of evidence of improvement and medical opinions supporting maximum medical improvement
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe claimant sought workers' compensation benefits following a compensable injury. At the hearing, the deputy found that the claimant had not reached …
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 Remedial Care cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This cause is before us on appeal from a workers’ compensation order finding that claimant has not reached maximum medical improvement and awarding him temporary total disability benefits, medical care and treatment as required by his injury, reimbursement for any outstanding medical and pharmaceutical expenses resulting from his compensable injury, and reimbursement for medical mileage. Since there is no competent, substantial evidence of any reasonable expectation of improvement in claimant’s condition and two doctors were of the opinion that claimant had reached maximum medical improvement before the hearing, we reverse and remand for a determination of the date of maximum medical improvement. We must also reverse the award of temporary total disability benefits without prejudice to claimant's right to seek an award of permanent disability benefits. Once the date of maximum medical improvement is determined by the deputy, further remedial care is improper, and the award of such benefits beyond that date must be reversed. Killebrew Manufacturing Company v. Dawson, 401 So. 2d 876 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).
There being no evidence as to medical mileage, the award of medical mileage at the statutory rate is reversed. On remand the deputy may determine medical mileage on proof thereof.
Finally, we reverse the award of reimbursement for outstanding medical and pharmaceutical expenses resulting from claimant’s compensable injury since notice of those expenses as an issue at the hearing was neither provided in the application for hearing nor in the notice of hearing. Sparton Electronics v. Heath, 414 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
BOOTH, SMITH and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Keller Kitchen Cabinets & Alexis, Inc. v. Holder, 586 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…, 409 So. 2d 153 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (“concurrent findings of MMI and the necessity of continuing medical care are erroneous as a matter of law”); Florida Structures, Inc. v. Morton, 443 So. 2d 444 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); City of Gainesville v. Helton, 458 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Lewis v. Town & Country Auto Body Shop, 447 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). The clear implication in these cases was that remedial medical benefits are simply unavailable after reaching MMI unless MMI is timely modified, and fur…
-
City OF Gainesville & Crawford & Co. v. Helton, 543 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)…d by these doctors up until August 10, 1983, the date of maximum medical improvement. Insofar as the award of payment of medical bills for remedial care and treatment extends beyond the date of MMI, it is improper. See City of Gainesville v. Helton, 458 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Contrary to claimant’s assertion, the deputy’s order does not contemplate palliative care. We also reverse that portion of the order directing the employer/servicing agent to pay for drugs prescribed by Doctors Hooshmand and T…
Authorities Cited
- Killebrew Mfg. Co. & the Home Indem. Co. v. Dawson, 401 So. 2d 876 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- Sparton Elecs. & CNA Ins. Grp. v. Heath, 414 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)