Sodpolis, Inc. v. Baregas
799 So.2d 361, 26 FLW D2633
Claimant settled workers' compensation case with medical remaining open. In addition to signing a joint petition settlement agreement, the claimant executed an affidavit in which he acknowledged the settlement agreement and stated that he understood that medical treatment was open so long as he did not allow a period of greater than two years to expire without receiving medical treatment. After the two-year period for receiving medical care ran with no medical cre being provided, the claimant filed a Petition for Rule Nisi to enforce the medical provisions of the settlement agreement that had been approved by order. Court determined that the Rule Nisi order should not have been entered by the lower court and determined that because the claimant executed the affidavit which explicitly described the two-year statute of limitations for receiving medical care, the employer/carrier was not estopped in relying on the statute of limitations defense in denying further medical care. See Gulfstream Press, Inc. v. Acle, 697 So.2d 213 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997).