Important Recent Florida Case Law

Monday, November 8, 2010 | 0

NEW! NFL Europa v. Charles, 1D10-3849, (11/05/2010): The 1st District Court of Appeal lacks appellate jurisdiction over a judge of compensation claims' order tolling the statute of limitations for a football player's future knee surgery.

NEW! City of Pembroke Pines v. Ortagus, 1D09-6168, (11/02/2010): An employer is not relieved from paying for a firefighter's continued hypertension treatment solely because he has returned to normal duty for several years.

NEW! Matrix Employee Leasing v. Pool, 1D10-3054, (11/02/2010): A judge of compensation claims has the authority to disqualify a claimant's law firm for conflict of interest.

Hernandez v. Geo Group, Inc., 1D09-4661, (10/29/2010): A judge of compensation claims was correct to deny a premature motion for permanent total disability benefits because the claimant had not yet reached maximum medical improvement, even though the judge's ruling contained some speculative findings.

Locker v. United Pharmaceutical Group, Inc., 1D10-0464, (10/29/2010): A judge of compensation claims should not have based a motion to dismiss upon a physician's opinion from a prior proceeding.

Cordovez v. High-Rise Installation, Inc., 1D09-5786, (10/29/2010): A claimant was not entitled to set aside his settlement for a condition unknown at the time of settlement, because the condition arose from an injury that both parties were aware of.

Harman v. Gadsen Correctional Facility, 1D10-1227, (10/29/2010): A judge of compensation claims should have required an employer to pay for a referral to an orthopedist to evaluate a claimant's seemingly subjective complaints.

Hack v. Chuck Norris Drywall, 1D10-2041, (10/29/2010): A judge of compensation claims denied a claimant's attorney fee petition on the mistaken belief that she lacked jurisdiction over the matter.

Crum v. Richmond, 1D10-0221, (10/25/2010): A judge of compensation claims needs to have evidence of permanent total disability after the date of maximum medical improvement, in order to issue a permanent total disability award.

Steel Dynamics v. Markham, 1D10-3279, (10/25/2010): A claimant's lie about why he was resigning did not bar him from obtaining future benefits because he did not make the misrepresentation with the intent to obtain workers' compensation benefits.

Pierre v. Royal Care, 1D10-1744, (10/25/2010): A nursing home worker is entitled to an attorneys fee for prevailing on a psychiatric evaluation request, because the employer's denial caused her attorney to spend 29 hours on the disputed matter.

Jones v. City of St. Petersburg, 1D10-1043, (10/25/10): The City of St. Petersburg must pay a claimant penalties and interest for failing to timely pay a permanent total disability benefits on an accepted claim.