COPELAND STEEL ERECTORS AND CNA INSURANCE GROUP, APPELLANTS,
v.
WALTER MILES, 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 evaluation by an endocrinologist but reversed the award of treatment, finding insufficient evidence of a causal connection.
Claimant injured his back in a compensable accident and later developed a thyroid nodule. His physician recommended an endocrinologist, opining the no…
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 Medical Treatment cases and more on FLexlaw
THOMPSON, Judge.
Employer/carrier (E/C) appeal a workers’ compensation order directing that claimant be provided with evaluation and treatment, “if necessary” by an endocrinologist. We affirm the award of evaluation, but reverse the award of treatment.
Claimant injured his low back in a compensable accident in 1982. Approximately two years later he developed a thyroid nodule. His authorized treating physician, a specialist in internal medicine and rheuma-tology, recommended that claimant be seen by an endocrinologist and opined that the nodule may have developed as a result of the stress and anxiety of claimant’s accident.
The deputy commissioner’s award of evaluation was proper; however, the award of treatment is improper unless a sufficient causal connection is established between claimant’s industrial accident and his medical complaints. Vero Beach Care Center v. Ricks, 476 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Lewis v. Town & Country Auto Body Shop, 447 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). The record before us does not show a causal connection between claimant’s industrial accident and his thyroid nodule. The results of the evaluation may provide the deputy commissioner with sufficient evidence to make a determination whether the requisite causal connection exists in order to award treatment.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part.
ZEHMER and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Carl v. Sumner, 526 So. 2d 1068 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…cost of the diagnostic test is compensable.” Sanchez v. Security Sales Co., 522 So. 2d 435, 436 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988) (quoting Nealy v. City of West Palm Beach, 491 So. 2d 585, 586 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)). In the case of Copeland Steel Erectors v. Miles, 483 So. 2d 107 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), this court held that a claimant who injured his lower back in a com-pensable accident and subsequently developed a thyroid nodule was entitled to diagnostic evaluation by an endocrinologist to determine whether a causal relation…
Authorities Cited
- Lewis v. Town & Country Auto Body Shop & Aetna Cas. & Sur., 447 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Vero Beach Care Ctr. & Associated Indus. of Fla. v. Ricks, 476 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)