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.
Holiday Foliage v. Anderson
642 So.2d 94
Claimant suffered from preexisting condition and
thereafter suffered a compensable accident on the job.
There was conflicting medical evidence as to the causal
connection between the need for continued medical care
and the industrial accident, one doctor stating that
the condition was totally related to a preexisting
condition and another stating that the on-the-job
accident aggravated the preexisting condition. Judge
determined that there was a causal connection between
the claimant's complaints of pain and the accident
based on the testimony of the one doctor and history
given by claimant. Lay testimony can establish the
necessary relationship as to conditions and symptoms
within the sensory experience and actual knowledge of
the claimant but is insufficient as to conditions which
are not readily observable such as high blood pressure
and soft tissue injuries. Court affirmed judge's
decision finding causal connection between the
claimant's complaints of pain and the on-the-job
accident. An appellate court is bound by the JCC's
findings even though the court may have reached a
different conclusion based on the same evidence, unless
the findings lack any substantial support in the
record.
Entitlement to temporary total disability benefits may
be shown by medical testimony that a claimant is unable
to work or by evidence of a good faith albeit
unsuccessful work search. In those cases where a work
search is indicated, temporary total benefits cannot be
denied for failure to search for work where the
claimant did not know that he had been medically
released to return to work. Doctor gave report that
claimant was temporarily and totally disabled. In
doctor's deposition, doctor stated that he only meant
that the claimant could not return to her former
employment. This information was never communicated to
the claimant and accordingly, benefits were awarded.
During period of temporary total, claimant was
incarcerated. Pursuant to Section 440.15(8), Florida
Statutes, the claimant was not entitled to receive
compensation for the periods of incarceration.
However, any compensation due for that period was
payable to the claimant's dependents.
