Delong v. 3015 West Corp., 89-1617
Decision Date | 05 March 1990 |
Docket Number | No. 89-1617,89-1617 |
Citation | 558 So.2d 108 |
Parties | 15 Fla. L. Weekly D613 Harold DELONG, Appellant, v. 3015 WEST CORPORATION, and Rockwood Insurance Company, Appellees. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Randall O. Reder, Tampa and Stephen L. Rosen of Morris & Rosen, P.A., Tampa, for appellant.
Rex A. Hurley of Zimmerman, Shuffield, Kiser & Sutcliffe, P.A., Orlando, for appellees.
I agree with the majority's conclusion that the judge properly determined that lawn care service is not awardable as a medical benefit in the circumstances of this case. However, I do not agree with the apparent recited standard that such benefit may not be awarded where it "would not improve claimant's condition or aid his recovery," by treatment of his injury. Section 440.13(2)(a), Florida Statutes, authorizes the award of such medically necessary services "as the nature of the injury or the process of recovery may require...." By this disjunctive phrasing the statute thus embraces services required by the nature of the injury, as well as those which would improve claimant's condition, further the process of recovery, or meet the medical need standards for treatment. But because the record in the present case establishes none of these criteria with regard to the requested law care service, the claim for this benefit was properly denied.
1 See §§ 440.13(1)(c), 440.13(2)(a), Fla.Stat. (1983).
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Timothy Bowser Const. Co. v. Kowalski
...on Dr. Lichtblau's opinion that recreational and social outings are a necessary part of Claimant's treatment. See Delong v. 3015 West Corp., 558 So.2d 108 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (affirming JCC's finding that lawn care service was not a medical necessity, despite physician's testimony that it w......
-
Polk County Bd. of Com'rs v. Varnado
...1990). An award of a benefit which would not improve claimant's condition or aid his recovery would be invalid. DeLong v. 3015 West Corp., 558 So.2d 108 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). Further, prior to awarding medical benefits, the JCC must determine that the need for the benefit was necessitated by......
-
Montgomery Ward v. Lovell
...and movies, despite medical testimony that such activities are "reasonably medically necessary for claimant...."); Delong v. 3015 West Corp., 558 So.2d 108 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (lawn care service was not a medical necessity, despite physician's testimony that it was "medically necessary" for......
-
AT & T Commc'ns v. Rosso
...the JCC's finding that such care will improve Claimant's compensable conditions of depression and anxiety. See Delong v. 3015 W. Corp. , 558 So.2d 108 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (affirming JCC's finding of no medical necessity for lawn care where physician admitted that such care would not improve......