OLYMPIC ASSOCIATES AND STATE FARM FIRE & CASUALTY CO., APPELLANTS,
v.
KELLY KIMMEL AND THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION, 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 reversed an award of workers' compensation benefits because the claimant failed to present medical evidence establishing a causal connection between the work activity and the injury based on reasonable medical probability.
A workers' compensation claimant must prove causation through medical evidence based on reasonable medical probability, and a physician's opinion that an injury exists is insufficient without evidence that the specific work activity caused the injury.
[1] A physician's opinion that a claimant has an injury, without evidence that the specific work activity caused the injury, does not constitute competent substantial evidenc…
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 workers' compensation claimant must prove the existence of a causal connection between the employment and injury for which benefits are sought, and the existence of causation must be based upon reasonable medical probability”
Established rule cited from Thomas v. Salvation Army regarding the burden of proof in workers' compensation cases
A claimant sought workers' compensation benefits for a neck injury allegedly sustained in an industrial accident. The judge of compensation claims awa…
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 Causal Connection Between Employment And Injury cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal of an order of the judge of compensation claims finding that the claimant’s injury is causally related to her industrial accident and awarding disability and medical benefits. As noted in Thomas v. Salvation Army, 562 So. 2d 746, 749 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), “[i]t is an established rule that a workers’ compensation claimant must prove the existence of a causal connection between the employment and injury for which benefits are sought, and the existence of causation must be based upon reasonable medical probability. Medical evidence as to causation is particularly significant where, as in the instant case, the subject injury is not readily observable.” (Citations omitted).
The judge of compensation claims based his finding of causation on the testimony, medical reports and finding of Dr. Stuart Kaplan. Nowhere in the medical reports or testimony of Dr. Kaplan does it appear that the nature of the activity alleged to give rise to the injury was described to Dr. Kaplan. The assertion by Dr. Kaplan that claimant reported being hurt at work coupled with an opinion that she has an injury to her neck does not amount to competent substantial evidence that the specific work activity is the cause of the diagnosed injury within a reasonable medical probability.
Because the claimant failed to present any medical evidence of causation, the order appealed is reversed.
ZEHMER, BARFIELD and ALLEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dep't OF Corr. v. Smith, 601 So. 2d 1342 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…PER CURIAM. The claimant having failed to prove that his need for rehabilitation benefits was caused by a compensable accident, the award of such benefits is reversed. See Olympic Associates v. Kimmel, 590 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Peters v. Armellini Express Lines, 527 So. 2d 266 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). ZEHMER, ALLEN and WOLF, JJ., concur.…
-
Winn Dixie & Crawford & Co. v. Ross, 654 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)…lationship between the employment and the medical condition for which benefits are sought, we must reverse the order appealed.” Brasington Cadillac-Oldsmobile v. Martin, 641 So. 2d 442, 445 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). See also Olympic Associates v. Kimmel, 590 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Peters v. Armellini Express [*638] Lines, 527 So. 2d 266 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Without evidence of a causal connection between the alleged accident of June 25th and the claimant’s current condition, the JCC erred in finding that…
Authorities Cited
- Thomas v. The Salvation Army & Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 562 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)