MIRALDA MORRISON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF VETERAN'S AFFAIRS AND DIVISION OF RISK MANAGEMENT, 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.
In this workers' compensation appeal, the court affirmed the denial of temporary partial disability (TPD) benefits, holding that the claimant failed to prove her compensable workplace injury required work restrictions. The court found that neither of the claimant's treating physicians opined that the workplace injury caused the need for work restrictions.
The claimant did not carry her burden to prove her compensable workplace injury required work restrictions from the date of accident to the date of maximum medical improvement. The denial of TPD benefits is affirmed because neither treating physician opined that the workplace injury led to the need for restrictions.
[1] A claimant seeking temporary partial disability benefits must prove that a compensable workplace injury required work restrictions.
[2] A judge of compensation claims may accept the testimony of one physician over another in determining the necessity of work restrictions.
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“neither of her treating physicians opined that the workplace injury led to the need for restrictions”
Establishes the critical failure of the claimant's proof—both physicians failed to connect the injury to the work restrictions
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 was under intermittent work restrictions from December 2008 to March 2009 following a workplace injury. The claimant's first treating phy…
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 Temporary Partial Disability Benefits cases and more on FLexlaw
In this workers’ compensation appeal, the claimant asks this Court to reverse a final order denying temporary partial disability (“TPD”) benefits. She argues the denial is not based on competent, substantial evidence. Although the claimant was under intermittent work restrictions from December 2008 to March 2009, neither of her treating physicians opined that the workplace injury led to the need for restrictions. The claimant’s first doctor testified unequivocally that the work restriction he imposed did not result from the compensable injury. And the judge of compensation claims (“JCC”) discounted the testimony of the claimant’s second doctor who equivocated as to the need for restrictions and who considered it reasonable to “backdate” the work restrictions to the date of injury. See City of West Palm Beach Fire Dep’t v. Norman, 711 So.2d 628, 629 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (JCC can accept testimony of one physician over another). We therefore affirm the denial of TPD benefits because the claimant did not carry her burden to prove her compensa-ble workplace injury required work restrictions from the date of accident to the date of maximum medical improvement. See § 440.15(4), Fla. Stat. (2007). We further remind the workers’ compensation community that although we normally review a JCC’s order to determine whether competent, substantial evidence supports it, “[a] decision in favor of the party without the burden of proof need not be supported by competent, substantial evidence.” Fitzgerald v. Osceola County Sch. Bd., 974 So.2d 1161, 1164 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (citing Mitchell v. XO Commc’ns, 966 So.2d 489, 490 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) (emphasis added)).
AFFIRMED.
BENTON, C.J., CLARK, and MARSTILLER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Fitzgerald v. Osceola Cnty. Sch. Bd. & Fla. Sch. Bd. Ins. Tr., 974 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)
- Mitchell v. XO Commc'ns & Wausau/Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. & XO Commc'ns & Travelers Ins. Co., 966 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)
- Caracciolo v. State, 711 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)
- City OF W. Palm Beach Fire Dept. & Johns E. v. Ernie Norman, 711 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)