City of Fort Lauderdale v. Kennedy, 87-70
| Citation | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1627,532 So.2d 6 |
| Decision Date | 13 July 1988 |
| Docket Number | No. 87-70,87-70 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
| Parties | 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1627 CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE and Risk Management, Appellants/Cross-Appellees, v. Michael KENNEDY and the Division of Workers Compensation, Department of Labor & Employment Security, State of Florida, Appellees/Cross-Appellants. |
Gregory G. Coican, of Pyszka, Kessler, Massey, Weldon, Catri, Holton & Douberley, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellants/cross-appellees.
Dennis Usdan, Plantation, and Joseph Segor, Miami, for appellee/cross-appellant Michael Kennedy.
The employer/carrier (E/C) in this workers compensation case appeal an order of the deputy commissioner (DC) ordering the E/C to reimburse claimant for payment of bills incurred in his treatment by an unauthorized chiropractor, and awarding the claimant temporary partial wage-loss benefits for the period from April 4, 1986 through October 2, 1986; the claimant cross-appeals the deputy's finding of no permanent impairment, and his failure to award future palliative chiropractic treatment.
We find competent substantial evidence in the record to support the award of temporary partial wage-loss benefits, and to support both of the findings challenged on cross appeal. We reverse the first issue raised on appeal, however, and remand for further proceedings.
The record indicates that the claimant, who was injured in a 1985 industrial accident, began receiving authorized chiropractic treatment by Dr. Marc Rogoff on September 17, 1985. On October 4, 1985, Rogoff released claimant to return to work, but claimant found that he was unable to perform his duties and, on April 4, 1986, resigned from his position with the appellant/employer. He then returned to Dr. Rogoff and received additional authorized treatment on several occasions through May 5, 1986. Several weeks after his last treatment, claimant began experiencing severe back and leg pain and attempted to obtain further authorization of Rogoff. After making several unsuccessful attempts to obtain authorization, claimant independently sought treatment by another chiropractor, Dr. Frank, who treated him as a private patient from June 19 through October 17, 1986.
Although the evidence presented at the hearing is conflicting, we find that there is competent substantial evidence in the record to support the deputy's conclusions that Dr. Rogoff's 1986 authorization by the E/C was for a limited number of treatments only,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Town & Country Farms v. Peck, 91-3533
...the case must be remanded for the JCC to make a specific finding regarding whether good cause exists. City of Ft. Lauderdale v. Kennedy, 532 So.2d 6 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Walt Disney World Co. v. Schiebel, 397 So.2d 1004 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Broward Industrial Plating, Inc. v. Weiby, supra. ......
-
Appellate motions for rehearing: when is enough really enough?
...R. APP. P. 9.225--it is not recommended that counsel wait until rehearing time to point out these new authorities. [18] Anderson, 532 So. 2d at 6; Jaytex, 105 So. 2d at [19] Id. [20] See, e.g., Whipple, 431 So. 2d at 1013; Anderson, 532 So. 2d at 6. [21] Elliott v. Elliott, 648 So. 2d 135, ......