Cases

JCC granted employer/carrier's motion to compel an independent medical examination (IME).  Claimant file a writ of certiorari to review the order.

To obtain a writ of certiorari, the claimant must show that there has been 1) a departure from the essential requirements of the law, 2) resulting in material injury for the remainder of the case 3) that cannot be corrected on post-judgment appeal.  Claimant objected to the independent medical examination itself and the choice of independent medical examiners. 

In regards to the IME, the claimant asserted that since there was no dispute, the granting of an IME was not authorized under Section 440.13(5)(a), Florida Statutes (2003).  The court found, however, that there was a dispute since the claimant had filed a claim for indemnity benefits which was still pending and which the employer/carrier was contesting.

The claimant also objected to the examiner based on the fact that the employer/carrier had already selected its independent medical examiner.  Court found that this argument had merit and concluded that each party was allowed to have one independent medical examiner (one single doctor) per accident.  Exceptions to this rule are as found in Section 440.13(5)(b) in which an alternate examiner can be utilized.  In this case, the employer/carrier did not cite any exception to the one independent medical examiner rule. 

The employer/carrier was seeking a different doctor to perform an IME in substitution of a doctor that had previously been designated as the IME doctor.  There was no evidence in the record to support the granting of an alternate IME.  Where there is a dispute in the material facts undergirding a party's request for an IME, evidence is necessary to support the awarding of an IME.