Caputo v. ABC Fine Wine & Spirits/Alternative Serv. Concepts, Inc., CASE NO. 1D11-4962

CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM
PartiesMICHAEL CAPUTO, Appellant, v. ABC FINE WINE & SPIRITS/ALTERNATIVE SERVICE CONCEPTS, INC., Appellees.
Decision Date11 July 2012
Docket NumberCASE NO. 1D11-4962

MICHAEL CAPUTO, Appellant,
v.
ABC FINE WINE & SPIRITS/ALTERNATIVE SERVICE CONCEPTS, INC., Appellees.

CASE NO. 1D11-4962

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

Opinion filed July 11, 2012


NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

An appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims.
Kathryn S. Pecko, Judge.

Date of Accident: March 3, 2010.

Bill McCabe, Longwood, and Steven Pyle, Maitland, for Appellant.

Brian T. Hanley, Winter Park, for Appellees.

PER CURIAM.

In this workers' compensation case, Claimant suffered a closed-head injury while engaged in the duties of his job on the premises of his Employer. The Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) ruled that the injury was idiopathic and not compensable because Claimant failed to prove that his employment involved an

Page 2

exertion greater than that performed during his daily life. Because the JCC applied the wrong test for determining compensability, we reverse.

FACTS

On March 3, 2010, Claimant, an electrician for the Employer, fell and hit his head on the floor while cutting down shelving with a saw in the Employer's store. Claimant was diagnosed with left temporal hemorrhage, seizure disorder possibly secondary to the left temporal hemorrhage, and toxic encephalopathy secondary to the left temporal hemorrhage. There is no dispute that Claimant was on the Employer's premises and performing one of his job duties when injured.

Claimant filed a petition for benefits seeking a determination that the industrial accident was compensable, temporary total disability benefits from March 3, 2010, to the present and continuing, penalties, interest, attorney's fees, and costs. The Employer/Carrier (E/C) denied the claim on the basis that Claimant's fall resulted either from a pre-existing or idiopathic condition.

Although Claimant recalled working that day, Claimant has no recollection of how the accident occurred. Claimant's independent medical examiner (IME), Dr. Ira. Goodman, opined that, rather than a seizure or fainting spell, Claimant's head impacting the floor caused Claimant's closed-head injuries. Dr. Goodman was unable to state within a reasonable degree of medical certainty whether any factor related to Claimant's employment caused the fall. The E/C's IME, Dr.

Page 3

Anthony Shydohub, also opined that the blow to Claimant's head from the floor, and not the fall, caused his brain to hemorrhage. Claimant's medical records indicate that...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT