Artigas v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., WINN-DIXIE

• Court: Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
• Writing for the Court: BOOTH
• Citation: 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1289,544 So.2d 1051
• Parties: 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1289 Miguel A. ARTIGAS, Appellant, v.STORES, INC. and Crawford and Company, Appellees.
• Docket Number: No. 87-1044,WINN-DIXIE,87-1044
• Decision Date: 25 May 1989

Page 1051

544 So.2d 1051 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1289 Miguel A. ARTIGAS, Appellant,
v.
WINN-DIXIE STORES, INC. and Crawford and Company, Appellees. No. 87-1044. District Court of Appeal of Florida,
First District. May 25, 1989.

Alex Lancaster of Alex Lancaster, P.A., Sarasota, for appellant.

Claire L. Hamner of Dickinson, O'Riorden, Gibbons, Quale, Shields & Carlton, P.A., Sarasota, for appellees.

BOOTH, Judge.

This cause is before us on appeal of an order of the deputy commissioner denying requested benefits for lack of evidence. For the following reasons, we reverse.

Claimant was injured unloading produce from the employer's truck in August 1983. Although the injury was to his spine, he soon began developing related mental problems. According to Dr. Lose, a psychiatrist whose testimony the deputy accepted in an earlier order, claimant currently suffers from posttraumatic psychosis. Symptoms include extreme paranoia, delusional, fragmented thinking, depression, and suicidal and homicidal inclinations. Claimant's condition seems to have worsened steadily during the several years since his injury, although he has been at physical maximum medical improvement since October 1986.

Although the deputy found that claimant's psychiatric condition was related to his compensable injury and ordered psychiatric treatment, claimant stopped seeing authorized psychiatrists after a few initial visits. The record reflects that during this time, he was "Baker Acted" for the first of

Page 1052

several times. Ultimately, doctors treating claimant for compensable physical problems found him impossible to work with and refused to treat him further. Claimant's attorney also withdrew from representation in 1986.

After 1986, claimant had no attorney and was unable to find one. Although the deputy found in several prior orders that claimant was incompetent to represent himself in his compensation proceeding, claimant did represent himself because he had no one else. The employer/carrier stopped paying temporary benefits in October 1986, and claimant filed his own request for permanent disability or other, alternative benefits.

The deputy entered an order in July 1987 denying all benefits. In August 1987, new counsel appeared on claimant's behalf to request that the merits order be temporarily vacated. Counsel hoped to obtain a circuit court determination of incompetency and appointment of a guardian. After hearing argument, the deputy declined the request,...