WALTER J. NANCE, APPELLANT,
v.
SCHOOL BOARD OF POLK COUNTY, AND HEWITT, COLEMAN & ASSOCIATES, APPELLEES
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 a physician's medical opinion cannot be rejected based on an inaccurate history without questioning the physician about the effect of the inaccuracy.
[1] A physician's medical opinion in a workers' compensation case cannot be rejected solely based on an inaccurate history unless the physician is questioned about the impact…
[2] A Judge of Compensation Claims errs by rejecting medical testimony regarding the cause of a claimant's condition without inquiring into the effect of any perceived inaccu…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceClaimant injured his shoulder in an industrial accident and sought temporary partial disability benefits. The Judge of Compensation Claims rejected a …
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 Claim For Temporary Partial Disability Benefits cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this workers’ compensation case, the claimant, Walter J. Nance, challenges the denial of his claim for temporary partial disability (TPD) benefits. Claimant argues that his claim was denied because the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) improperly rejected medical testimony that related his shoulder condition to an industrial accident. We agree that the testimony should not have been rejected, and we reverse the denial of benefits.
Claimant injured his shoulder in an August 1987 industrial accident. In the course of examining the claimant, Dr. Tax-dal, a neurosurgeon, discovered a congenital neck condition. According to Dr. Tax-dal, it was this congenital condition, possibly aggravated during employment, that was the cause of claimant’s difficulties. Restrictions were placed on lifting and bending. Claimant was later referred to Dr. Spalding, a rheumatologist, who diagnosed a post-traumatic inflammatory process in claimant’s shoulder. Dr. Spalding related claimant’s shoulder problems to the August 1987 industrial accident, and opined that claimant’s neck abnormality was a separate condition. Dr. Spalding also placed restrictions on lifting.
In his order denying benefits, the JCC found that the restrictions imposed by Dr. Taxdal were due to claimant’s congenital neck condition and did not relate to an industrial accident. Dr. Spalding’s testimony to the contrary was rejected because it appeared that Dr. Spalding was misinformed as to a detail of claimant’s employment history.
We have held that a physician’s medical opinion cannot be rejected on the basis of an inaccurate history unless the physician is questioned regarding the effect of the inaccuracy on his previously expressed opinion. Faucher v. R.C.F. Developers, 569 So. 2d 794 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). As no inquiry was made of Dr. Spalding concerning the effect of the inaccuracy, we conclude that it was error for the JCC to reject the testimony. We therefore reverse the denial of TPD benefits and remand the case for consideration of Dr. Spalding’s testimony.
ERVIN, ZEHMER and MINER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ullman v. City OF Tampa Parks Dep't & Alexsis, 625 So. 2d 868 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…la. 1st DCA 1991), quashed, Easkold v. Rhodes, 614 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 1993). . Finney v. Agrico Chemical, 599 So. 2d 1359 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Cozzens v. St. Joe Container Co., 596 So. 2d 135 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Nance v. School Board of Polk County, 582 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). . Of course not every error or omission in the factual predicate upon which an expert bases an opinion necessarily justifies disregarding that expert's opinion. On the other hand, some facts are so critical to the validity of t…
-
Schafrath v. Marco BAY Resort, Ltd., 608 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…on medical causation would change based on the facts as found by the judge, the judge should not have “speculated” that Dr. Kapp’s professional opinion would have changed had he been given the different history. Nance v. School Board of Polk County, 582 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 1st DCA1991); Faucher v. R.C.F. Developers, 569 So. 2d 794 (Fla. 1st DCA1990); Jones v. Citrus Central, Inc., 537 So. 2d 1123, 1127. With these additional comments, I fully concur in the panel opinion. . Section 440.26, Florida Statutes (198…
-
Finney v. Agrico Chem. Co. & Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 599 So. 2d 1359 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…lly inquiring about the effect of the false or omitted information on the doctor’s previously expressed opinion. Faucher v. R.C.F. Developers, 569 So. 2d 794, 801 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (citations omitted); accord Nance v. School Board of Polk County, 582 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). See also Rhodes v. Easkold, 588 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Morey v. Harper, 541 So. 2d 1285 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 551 So. 2d 461 (Fla.1989). Similarly, because Drs. Eissman and Mozingo were never questioned about the…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Faucher v. R.C.F. Developers, 569 So. 2d 794 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)