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.
Luttrell v. Roger Holler Chevrolet
18 FLW D2265, October 15, 1993
Medical records of claimant's prior industrial accident were properly admitted into evidence. The documents which claimant himself signed were properly admissible under Section 90.608(1)(a), Florida Statutes, which allows the introduction of a witness' prior inconsistent statements for the purpose of impeachment. (The claimant's signature on the prior First Report of Accident allowed for the admission into evidence of the prior first report.) The medical records were also admissible under Section 90.803(18)(a), Florida Statutes, which permits the introduction of a statement offered against a party if it is the party's own statement in either an individual or a representative capacity. Even if the records of the doctor were not properly admissible under the business record's acception to the hearsay rule, such information as contained in the doctor's records were largely cumulative to other admissible documents and the admission was harmless. Records consisting of insurance claim forms from a prior adjuster's file and the doctor's progress report to that prior injury were also admissible under Section 90.803(18)(c) permitting the admission into evidence of a statement by a person specifically authorized by a party to make this statement concerning the subject. The insurance claims forms for the prior injury contained the claimant's authorization for "the release of any medical information necessary to process this claim."Court reversed JCC's finding that claimant did not sustain a permanent impairment from compensable accident. Claimant had sustained prior injury but medical records of prior injury indicated that the claimant had reached maximum medical improvement with no resulting disability. Claimant was capable of working up until second compensable accident which resulted in permanent restrictions. Court determined that evidence of record demonstrated that claimant did sustain a permanent impairment from industrial accident even though in certain circumstances, the treating physicians were not aware of the claimant's back problems. The claimant was able to work following the first accident until the occurrence of the second accident. This supported a determination that there was a permanent aggravation of the preexisting back condition, notwithstanding the fact that the claimant had not been truthful with the treating physicians on the preexisting problems he was suffering from.
