Hunt v. International Minerals and Chemical Corp.

• Decision Date: 08 March 1982
• Docket Number: No. AB-408,AB-408
• Citation: 410 So.2d 640
• Parties: Harold E. HUNT, Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL MINERALS AND CHEMICAL CORPORATION, Appellee.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

Page 640

410 So.2d 640

Harold E. HUNT, Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL MINERALS AND CHEMICAL CORPORATION, Appellee.

No. AB-408.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 8, 1982.

Susan R. Whaley of MacFarlane, Ferguson, Allison & Kelly, Tampa, and W. James Kelly, Lakeland, for appellant.

Charles E. Bentley and C. Kenneth Stuart, Jr., of Holland & Knight, Bartow, for appellee.

WENTWORTH, Judge.

Claimant/appellant in this workers' compensation case appeals an order of February 4, 1981, dismissing a claim for temporary disability compensation on the ground that it covered disability antedating an order of October 31, 1980, and was necessarily determined by that order. We affirm.

Claimant suffered a compensable accident on January 20, 1976. On October 5, 1976, he filed a claim for temporary total, temporary partial, permanent partial and permanent total disability as well as medical benefits, rehabilitation benefits, etc. No hearing was held on the claim until August 22, 1980. This hearing was pursuant to an application for hearing filed by the employer/carrier stating that the reason for requesting a hearing was "Final hearing to conclude this matter." The notice of hearing was sent on July 9, 1980, stating that the object of the hearing was "Final hearing to determine merits of the claim." The pre-trial stipulation sheet stated that the claim to be heard was for permanent partial disability (PPD) benefits. On October 31, 1980, an order was entered by Deputy Commissioner Blankner. That order stated that the claim was for PPD of the arm in excess of the 25% previously accepted; loss of wage earning capacity in excess of anatomical rating; costs, interest and attorney's fees. PPD benefits were awarded and the order stated a reservation of jurisdiction to determine attorney's fees "as well as other issues as they may arise."

In November 1980 claimant filed an application for hearing on the issue of temporary benefits. The employer/carrier filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds that the August 22, 1980 hearing was final and that if claimant disagreed with the resulting order his remedy was to appeal. A hearing was held on the motion on January 1, 1981, before Deputy Commissioner Fontaine, who agreed with the employer/carrier and dismissed the claim by order dated February 4, 1981. That order is now appealed.

Appellant argues that the October 1980 order was limited to a determination of permanent benefits because of the pre-trial stipulation, but that the stipulation did not waive his right to other benefits. In addition, appellant points to the piecemeal nature which is inherent in, and unique to, workers' compensation proceedings. The comment following Fla.W.C.R.P. 16 treats that doctrine:

Workers' compensation cases, of necessity, are taken up piecemeal. A workers' compensation case requires this treatment because the various entitlements of the claimant (which generate potential issues to be heard by the Deputy Commissioner) mature at different times as the course of the claimant's physical recovery progresses. A workers' compensation case, unlike other personal injury litigation, can engender successive issues as to medical treatment, the entitlement to temporary disability benefits, the entitlement to permanent disability benefits, as well as ancillary issues of penalties, costs, attorney's fees and some other rather exotic issues. These can result in successive hearings and successive orders which are all equally final, and all equally appealable. This is not only necessitated...