Harris v. Josephs of Greater Miami, Inc.
| Decision Date | 13 July 1960 |
| Citation | 122 So.2d 561 |
| Parties | Dorothy HARRIS, Petitioner, v. JOSEPHS OF GREATER MIAMI, INC., Old Colony Insurance Company and the Florida Industrial Commission, Respondents. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Charles F. Lindsay, Miami, for petitioner.
Dixon, DeJarnette, Bradford, Williams, McKay & Kimbrell, Miami, Guy A. Gladson, Jr., Perrine, Burnis T. Coleman and Paul E. Speh, Tallahassee, of counsel, for respondents.
MOODY, JAMES S., Circuit Judge.
This is a petition for writ of certiorari to the Florida Industrial Commission seeking review of an order of the Commission affirming an order of the Deputy Commissioner denying claim of petitioner and claimant below, Dorothy Harris.
The only question to be determined is whether there was competent substantial evidence before the Deputy Commissioner in accordance with logic and reason to sustain the finding that there was no causal connection proven between claimant's employment and her injury, namely, a case of contact dermatitis.
Claimant, age 64, was employed by Josephs of Greater Miami, employer herein, and had been so employed for approximately a year prior to December 1956 at which time she developed a dermatitis condition of her hands, arms, and body. She saw several doctors and in April 1957 Dr. Joseph Burns of Miami Beach, a specialist in internal medicine, diagnosed her case as contact dermatitis related to her employment resulting from the use of hair dyes. She was treated, including hospital confinement and discharged by him in September, 1957. However, she continued to have the same difficulties. On the basis of Dr. Burns' report voluntary compensation payments were paid claimant from May 1957 to July 1958. Claimant filed her claim for further benefits in September 1957. Hearings were held by the Deputy Commissioner and testimony taken of the claimant, Dorothy Harris, her doctor, Dr. Burns, and of Dr. Wiley Sams, a specialist of dermatology, who had been appointed by the Deputy Commissioner to examine claimant. By stipulation reports of Dr. Hollis Garrard covering claimant's condition were filed. The Deputy Commissioner dismissed the claim finding that there was no evidence that any chemical used in claimant's employment caused or aggravated the dermatitis condition. The order was affirmed by the full commission.
The evidence disclosed that claimant had been a beauty parlor operator for over 30 years using chemicals and dyes in her employment during all such period with no prior history of dermatitis. She used rubber gloves to her wrists in such work. In her statements to Dr. Burns and before the Deputy Commissioner her first discomfort was an itching and burning on her hands spreading to her arms and body developing into the usual swelling, blistering and discomfort associated with dermatitis. Dr. Burns testified the disease in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ullman v. City of Tampa Parks Dept.
...not sufficient to eliminate the necessity of proving the foundation facts necessary to support the opinion. Harris v. Josephs of Greater Miami, Inc., 122 So.2d 561, 562 (Fla.1960). In workers' compensation cases, the judge's findings must be sustained if permitted by any view of the evidenc......
-
Brasington Cadillac-Oldsmobile v. Martin, CADILLAC-OLDSMOBILE and C
...substantial evidence, a causal connection between the employment and the injury or condition at issue. Harris v. Josephs of Greater Miami, Inc., 122 So.2d 561 (Fla.1960); Munroe Memorial Hosp. v. Thompson, 388 So.2d 1338 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). Cf. O'Day v. Taylor Rental Center, 395 So.2d 1194......
-
Martin Marietta Corp. v. Glumb, 87-106
...a causal relationship between the injury and the employment. Lake v. Irwin Yacht & Marine, 398 So.2d at 904. In Harris v. Josephs of Greater Miami, 122 So.2d 561, 562 (Fla.1960), the court explained that in cases involving disease or physical defect, as opposed to external injury, "[t]here ......
-
Martinez v. Lobster Haven, LLC
...sufficient to eliminate the necessity of proving the foundation facts necessary to support the opinion," Harris v. Josephs of Greater Miami, Inc., 122 So. 2d 561, 562 (Fla. 1960) ; "an expert cannot merely pronounce a conclusion that the negligent act more likely than not caused the injury,......