PUBLIC GAS COMPANY AND NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
RANDY SHAW, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1985-02-18
No. AY-225
JOANOS and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.
464 So. 2d 1243 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1985) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

In this workers' compensation appeal, the court affirmed an award of permanent total disability (PTD) benefits to an injured worker whose post-traumatic stress disorder prevented him from working, despite employer/carrier arguments that PTD requires physical rather than psychiatric limitations. The decision clarifies that psychiatric disabilities resulting from compensable physical injuries are cognizable under Florida's workers' compensation statute.


Holding

PTD benefits are available when a claimant is unable to work because of a psychiatric disorder related to a compensable physical injury, and the statutory language requiring "physical limitation" does not preclude such benefits. The deputy properly denied the employer/carrier's motion to compel the Oppens Transfer surgery where the treating psychiatrist opposed it and testified the surgery would likely deteriorate the claimant's psychiatric condition.


Headnotes

[1] Permanent total disability benefits may be awarded when a claimant's inability to work is due to a psychiatric disorder related to a compensable physical injury.

[2] The "physical limitation" language in workers' compensation statutes does not preclude benefits when a claimant's inability to work is due to economic conditions.

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

Key Quotes

“where there has been a physical accident and claimant's disability is increased or prolonged by traumatic neurosis or conversion hysteria, the claimant's full disability, including the effects of the neurosis, is compensable”

Establishes the governing legal principle from Racz that psychiatric disabilities resulting from physical injuries are compensable under workers' compensation law

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Shaw suffered a left hand and wrist injury in an industrial accident on August 31, 1980. His treating psychiatrist, Dr. Stillman, diagnosed him with p…

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.


Opinion of the Court
MILLS, Judge.

MILLS, Judge.

Public Gas Company and Union Fire Insurance Company (E/C) appeal from a workers’ compensation order awarding the claimant, Shaw, permanent total disability (PTD) benefits, and denying the E/C’s motion to compel surgery. We affirm.

Shaw injured his left hand and wrist in an industrial accident on 31 August 1980. According to his treating psychiatrist, Dr. Stillman, Shaw developed post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of the accident. In Stillman’s opinion, the disorder was so severe that it prevented Shaw from performing even light work without interruption. Based on Stillman’s testimony, the deputy awarded PTD benefits from the date of maximum medical improvement.

The E/C argue the PTD award is erroneous because the evidence allegedly does not show Shaw’s inability to work is due to physical limitation as required by Section 440.15(l)(b), Florida Statutes (Supp.1980). In Racz v. Chennault, Inc., 418 So. 2d 413 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), however, this Court reversed an order denying PTD benefits where the treating psychiatrist said the claimant had a “psychogenic pain disorder or hysterical conversion neurosis and would remain 100 percent psychiatrically disabled.” The Court said:

The employer/carrier also urges affirmance of the order below on grounds “physical” as opposed to merely “psychiatric” impairment is essential for an award of permanent total disability pursuant to Section 440.15(l)(b), Florida Statutes. However, it is well settled that, where there has been a physical accident and claimant’s disability is increased or prolonged by traumatic neurosis or conversion hysteria, the claimant’s full disability, including the effects of the neurosis, is compensable. ... Since the AMA Guides also include criteria for assigning permanent impairment based on psychiatric or mental illness, this contention is without merit.

418 So. 2d at 415.

The E/C contend Racz is distinguishable because, unlike the case now under consideration, the claimant could not work because of actual pain. This distinction is superficial because the pain was nevertheless a symptom of the claimant’s psychiatric problems. We interpret Racz to mean, and we agree, that Section 440.-15(l)(b) does not preclude PTD benefits when a claimant is unable to work because of a psychiatric disorder related to a compensable physical injury.

We do not agree with the E/C that this interpretation of Section 440.15(l)(b) proves too much because it renders the “physical limitation” language of that statutory provision unnecessary. The language clearly precludes PTD benefits when a claimant’s inability to work is due to economic conditions. Cf., Regency Inn v. Johnson, 422 So. 2d 870 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).

The E/C next assert the order should be vacated because it is stale. The order appealed was not entered until 63 days after the close of evidence. Although in a proper case we have authority to find an order entered after the 30-day period of Section 440.25(3)(b), Florida Statutes (1979), stale and to remand for a new hearing, Rappoport v. American Hospital, 406 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), the interests of justice do not require such action in this case. In addition, we reject the E/C’s contention that the order is unamenable to appellate review. Finally, we uphold the deputy’s denial of the E/C’s motion to compel Shaw to undergo further surgery. The two treating orthopedic surgeons recommended Shaw undergo a hand operation known as an Oppens Transfer. The evidence, however, showed Shaw had already undergone surgery, for the most part unsuccessful, to repair the injured hand. Also, Dr. Stillman testified he did not recommend the Oppens Transfer, and that Shaw’s psychiatric condition would likely deteriorate should he be required to submit to the operation. Under these circumstances, the deputy did not abuse her discretion in refusing to require the operation.

AFFIRMED.

JOANOS and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Sarasota Cnty. Sch. Board/Optacomp v. Roberson, 135 So. 3d 587 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
    …employee’s residence, due to his or her physical limitation. [*589] The JCC rejected the E/C’s argument, reasoning that this statutory provision was sufficiently similar to the 1980 version of the statute which this Court, in Public Gas Co. v. Shaw, 464 So. 2d 1243 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), determined did not preclude an award of PTD benefits when the psychiatric condition was related to the compensa-ble physical injury. Further, the JCC explained, the Legislature in 2003 took the opportunity to address psychiatric…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw