Cases

Claimant filed a petition for temporary benefits.  Part of the claimed benefits were denied because of the fact that the claimant had reached maximum medical improvement.  That order was appealed and was currently on appeal.  A subsequent petition was filed seeking temporary benefits for periods of time subsequent to times in prior order.  JCC determined that he did not have jurisdiction to make a decision on the second filed petition since this would require him to resolve the same issues concerning the date of maximum medical improvement that had been decided in the first case that was on appeal. The second order finding no jursidiction was appealed.  Court determined that the standard of appellate review was de novo when the issue on appeal is subject matter jurisdiction.

Under Section 440.15(4)(a), Florida Statutes (2014), TPD benefits are payable if MMI has not been reached and medical conditions resulting from a compensable injury create restrictions.  A finding of MMI is precluded where a claimant is entitled to remedial care, i.e., where there is a reasonable expectation that the necessary treatment will bring about some degree of recovery even if that treatment ultimately proves ineffective.

Court determined that JCC erred in concluding that once the claimant was at MMI, he must forever stay at MMI. There can be changes of condition that may entitle a claimant to further remedial care even after assignment of a date of MMI.  Accordingly, even if the prior order had found MMI, there was still a possibility that the MMI date had changed.  Accordingly, the judge did have jurisdiction to make a determination on whether there is a new MMI date allowing for an award of temporary benefits.  The prior order and award of temporary benefits should have been interpreted as awarding temporary benefits "to the date of the hearing and for as long as such benefits are proper" as opposed to an order awarding temporary benefits "through the present and continuing."