Cases

In this case, the JCC erred in determining that the treating chiropractor was authorized by the employer/carrier as a matter of law. No request by the claimant had been made for chiropractic care in addition to that care which had been previously authorized and it was error to determine the chiropractor was authorized when the claimant sought treatment from the doctor without specific authorization from the employer/carrier. Notwithstanding the fact that the chiropractor was not authorized, court determined that there was competent and substantial evidence of record to support the award of temporary benefits to the claimant. The claimant testified that he was unable to work during the period in question and that the authorized treating physician had never advised her she could return to work.