Cases

JCC ruled that the claim for surgery made by the claimant was premature and there was no medical testimony from the authorized treating physician that such surgery was needed. On appeal, JCC's findings reversed. The employer/carrier waived any objections on the grounds of ripeness and specificity by not asserting that defense or moving to dismiss the claim. There was an IME opinion presented by the claimant's attorney indicating that surgery was needed for the claimant whereas the treating authorized doctor stated that surgery was not needed. Court determined that IME opinions are admissible and can support claims for specific medical benefits.