Department of Offender Rehabilitation v. Godwin

Decision Date10 March 1981
Docket NumberNo. UU-64,UU-64
PartiesDEPARTMENT OF OFFENDER REHABILITATION and Division of Risk Management, Appellants, v. Bertie Mae GODWIN, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

R. Dennis Comfort and Anthony J. Salzman, of Jones & Langdon, Gainesville, for appellants.

S. David Cox, Gainesville, for appellee.

JOANOS, Judge.

The claimant/appellee in this workers' compensation appeal had three accidents involving the same employer over a two and a half year period. The first took place on March 4, 1975 when the claimant fell and injured primarily her right knee. She filed a separate claim against the employer for the 1975 injury; the disposition of that claim is not a subject of this appeal. The claimant's next two accidents allegedly occurred within one month of each other. On July 27, 1977, the claimant experienced upper back pain while lifting a patient, and on August 15, 1977, the claimant fell, apparently injuring her right knee and low back. When the claimant filed her claim seeking temporary and partial disability benefits, as well as medical expenses, she referred only to August 15, 1977 as the date of the accident although she did suggest that a "merger" of injuries had occurred. A hearing was held on this claim, and the deputy commissioner found that the claimant's August 15th injuries were "superimposed on a prior injury." The employer/appellant was ordered to pay temporary total disability ("TTD") benefits from the date of the accident to September 6, 1978 and permanent total disability ("PTD") benefits thereafter. The deputy also found that the claimant reached maximum medical improvement ("MMI") on December 19, 1977. The employer appeals this order and raises several meritorious points.

One error in the order is the deputy's inconsistent finding with regard to the breaking point between temporary and permanent disability. The deputy ordered payment of TTD until September 6, 1978 yet found that MMI was reached on December 19, 1977. It is a principle of Workers' Compensation Law that except under unusual circumstances not present here, the date of MMI marks the end of temporary disability and the beginning of permanent disability. Corral v. McCrory Corp., 228 So.2d 900 (Fla.1969). Thus, the deputy's award of TTD almost 10 months after the date he found for MMI is faulty.

The deputy's determination on MMI is erroneous in another respect. In the record, the only evidence regarding December 19, 1977, the date that the deputy found as MMI, is that it was the date when a physician wrote his report. In that report, the doctor stated that MMI occurred on November 17, 1977. Even the validity of the November date is questionable, however, because of contradictory notes written by the same physician and the claimant's testimony that the December report was the result of a secretarial error. In any event, the inconsistent and unsupported findings made by the deputy necessitate a reconsideration of the MMI date which is based upon competent substantial evidence and which coincides with the end of temporary benefits and the beginning of permanent benefits.

As another issue raised on appeal, the employer argued that the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Keller Kitchen Cabinets v. Holder, 88-3204
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • August 8, 1991
    ...noted upon changed condition. Coca-Cola Bottling Company v. Tunson, 534 So.2d 910 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Department of Offender Rehabilitation v. Godwin, 394 So.2d 1091 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Except to the extent that Section 440.28 permits modification, compensation orders are governed by the ......
  • City of Pensacola Firefighters v. Oswald
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 15, 1998
    ...228 So.2d 900 (Fla.1969); Anderson & Padgett Sawmill v. Collins, 686 So.2d 795 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Department of Offender Rehabilitation v. Godwin, 394 So.2d 1091 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). "Date of maximum medical improvement" means the date after which further recovery from, or lasting improve......
  • ORANGE COUNTY SCHOOL BD. v. Melman
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • August 25, 1998
    ...900, 903 (Fla. 1969); Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Tunson, 534 So.2d 910, 911 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); Department of Offender Rehabilitation v. Godwin, 394 So.2d 1091, 1092 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Broward County Bd. of County Comm'rs v. Damore, 391 So.2d 286, 286 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). "The date of max......
  • Hewett v. Town of Mayo, 91-3396
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • February 17, 1993
    ...inconsistent regarding date of MMI and percentage of PI), review denied, 413 So.2d 876 (Fla.1982); Department of Offender Rehab. v. Godwin, 394 So.2d 1091 (Fla. 1st DCA1981) (reversing and remanding order containing inconsistent finding with regard to MMI and breaking point between temporar......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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