City of Fort Lauderdale v. Flanders, AH-449
| Decision Date | 20 July 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. AH-449,AH-449 |
| Parties | CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE, Appellant, v. Grady FLANDERS, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Albert P. Massey, III, of Pyszka & Kessler, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
Marvin J. Kristal, North Miami, of Ira J. Druckman, P. A., Miami, for appellee.
Appellant employer appeals the deputy commissioner's order directing employer to pay the medical bills of Dr. Centrone, who performed an unauthorized operation on appellee. We reverse.
Appellee injured his back in a June 12, 1979, work-related accident and thereafter received authorized medical treatment. In October 1979, he was seen by Dr. Centrone for authorized evaluation and tests. Dr. Centrone recommended back surgery. In December 1979, appellant had appellee examined by Dr. Sheffel, a neurosurgeon. Dr. Sheffel recommended against surgery. Appellant then denied further authorization of Dr. Centrone and specifically authorized further treatment from three other doctors, including Sheffel. In March 1980, appellee requested that the deputy commissioner appoint another evaluating physician. On May 1, 1980, the deputy commissioner authorized Dr. Woolsey who, after examination, recommended against surgery. Several times, appellee sought authorization of Dr. Centrone. Each time, appellant refused authorization but continued to authorize treatment from other qualified doctors. By June 16, 1980, Dr. Centrone was aware that he was no longer authorized. Nevertheless, on August 21, 1980, he performed the nonemergency back operation on appellee. Appellee did not seek a hearing before the deputy commissioner prior to that surgery for a decision as to whether appellant would be responsible for the bills resulting therefrom.
The evidence is undisputed that appellee's condition has improved since the surgery. After the hearing, the deputy commissioner accepted Dr. Centrone's opinion that the surgery was reasonable and necessary and thereupon found that appellant, having failed to provide necessary treatment despite numerous requests by appellee, is responsible for the medical bills incurred.
Section 440.13(2), Florida Statutes, provides:
If an injured employee objects to the medical attendance furnished by the employer, it shall be the duty of the employer to select another physician to treat the injured employee [as was done in this case] unless a deputy commissioner determines that a change in medical attendance is not for the best interests of the injured employee; however, a deputy commissioner may at any time, for good cause shown, in the deputy commissioner's discretion, order a change in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Robinson v. Shands Teaching Hosp.
...to seek unauthorized psychiatric care and later have the reasonableness and necessity of that action determined by the commissioner. The Flanders case [City of Ft. Lauderdale v. Flanders, 416 So.2d 1234 (Fla. 1st DCA1982) ] cited by appellant may be clearly distinguished by the fact that th......
-
FCCI Mut. Ins. Co. v. Schnupp
...1189 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); accord Commercial Carriers, Inc. v. Porter, 424 So.2d 155 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); City of Fort Lauderdale v. Flanders, 416 So.2d 1234 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)(holding claimant not entitled to reimbursement for cost of back surgery performed by physician who knew he had not......
-
Fuchs Baking Co. v. Estate of Szlosek
...services were not provided by them, and claim that Section 440.13(2)(b), Florida Statutes (1983) and City of Ft. Lauderdale v. Flanders, 416 So.2d 1234 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) dictate that claimant should have sought authorization of Dr. Stillman prior to beginning treatment by him. Further, th......
-
Marcy v. Charlotte County Sheriff's Office, 91-803
...Corp. v. Freilich, 464 So.2d 217 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Usher v. Cothron, 445 So.2d 387 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); City of Fort Lauderdale v. Flanders, 416 So.2d 1234 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Delta Airlines v. Underwood, 406 So.2d 1188 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); and Mt. Sinai Medical Center v. Lack, 381 So.2......