St. Augustine Marine Canvas and Upholstery, Inc. v. Lunsford
30 FLW D2853
The employer/carrier has the initial right to select treating physicians for injured workers. After authorization of medical care by the employer/carrier, the employee may request a one-time change of physicians. In that case, the employer must offer the employee a choice of three alternative physicians. See Section 440.13(2)(f), Florida Statutes (2002)(see statutory change). If an injured worker requests medically necessary treatment and the employer fails to provide it within a reasonable time, the employee may obtain such treatment at the employer’s expense. See Section 440.13(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2002).
To be eligible for payment, a health care provider must receive authorization from the carrier before providing treatment. A health care provider’s referral to another health care provider does not constitute authorization by the carrier. See Section 440.13(3)(c), Florida Statutes (2002). When one health care provider refers an employee to another health care provider for treatment, Section 440.13(3)(d), Florida Statutes, applies, i.e., the employer/carrier is required to respond within the third business day after receipt of the request for the referral. If no such response is made, there is a consent implied to such referral as a matter of law. Notice to the employer does not constitute notice to the carrier. Section 440.13(3)(d), Florida Statutes, applies only to requests from doctors for referrals to other doctors. If the employee makes the request for a referral, the employer/carrier has a “reasonable time” to respond.
In this case, court determined that employer/carrier provided medical treatment to the claimant as required by law. The claimant requested treatment by a specific doctor and the employer/carrier authorized three other doctors (not the one requested by the claimant). It was determined that the claimant’s choice of physicians was not authorized, and since he was not an expert medical advisor, an independent medical examiner, or an authorized treating physician, his testimony was not admissible and any award of benefits based upon his testimony was in error.
Court also concluded that claimant’s choice of physician did not qualify as an independent medical examiner since by statute, an attorney representing a claimant is not authorized to schedule an independent medical examination. In addition, the claimant did not designate his chosen physician as an independent medical examiner until after the doctor had evaluated the claimant.