Punsky v. Clay County Sheriffs Office
34 FLW D469
En banc decision. Previous decision reported at 33 FLW D1820 withdrawn. Claimant, a deputy sheriff, suffered a heart attack while asleep and sought compensability of condition pursuant to the "firefighter’s presumption" as found in Section 112.18(1), Florida Statutes. JCC denied presumption based on the fact that the claimant had failed a pre-employment physical examination since he had a preexisting heart condition. The determination that the claimant did have a heart problem prior to his employment with the Clay County Sheriff’s Office was established by retrospective medical opinions that the claimant had heart conditions prior to his employment as a deputy sheriff. Court determined, however, that such retrospective opinions do not demonstrate that an otherwise qualified employee failed a pre-employment physical examination.
Even though the presumption of compensability should have been applied in this instance, the court determined that there was competent and substantial evidence that the presumption of compensability was overcome by medical evidence to support the conclusion that the claimant’s heart attack was caused by non-occupational reasons.
Where there is conflicting evidence as to the cause of the claimant’s heart attack either being work related or non-work related, and the quantum of proof is balanced, the presumption would prevail in establishing compensability of the heart attack. However, this would not foreclose the employer/carrier from overcoming the presumption. The presumption can be overcome by clear and convincing evidence. Where the only evidence of the compensability of the heart attack is the presumption of compensability, the presumption can be overcome by competent and substantial evidence.
The employer/carrier’s ability to rebut the presumption of compensability is not limited by the obligation to demonstrate a single non-industrial cause. The non-industrial causation may be shown through demonstrating a combination of wholly non-industrial causes. Court determined that there was competent and substantial evidence to support the JCC’s conclusion that the heart attack was non-work related. Claimant sought to determine compensability of heart condition based solely on the presumption as found in Section 112.18(1), Florida Statutes. Concurring opinion.