Workers' Compensation
Listed below is McConnaughhay, Coonrod, Pope, Weaver & Stern, P.A.'s workers' compensation case law database. The database dates back until 1971 and includes over 5500 workers' compensation court decisions.
To view the case summaries, select one of the general topics listed below.
Rouse v. Wyldwood Tropical Nurseries
416 So.2d 847, (Fla.App. 1 Dist., Jul 08, 1982)
In this case there was conflicting testimony of two doctors as to the date of MMI. The question is whether the DC must explain why he accepts the testimony of one doctor over that of another. In the case of Pierce v. Piper Aircraft Corp. the court stated that where the testimony of two or more witnesses of comparable qualifications are in direct conflict it is helpful if some explanation is given in the order as to why one witness's testimony is accepted over another. This was clarified in the case of Buro v. Dinos Southland Meat Co. when the Supreme Court stated that it is not essential for a DC to explain exactly why he accepts the testimony of one doctor and rejects that of another. The dividing line between the point at which it is helpful to have an explanation as opposed to when it is mandatory arises when 1) The reason for the finding in the order is not apparent from the record or 2) it might appear the DC had overlooked or ignored the testimony of a witness.
