Medeiros v. Residential Communities of America

Citation481 So.2d 92,11 Fla. L. Weekly 177
Decision Date07 January 1986
Docket NumberNo. BF-13,BF-13
Parties11 Fla. L. Weekly 177 Denise MEDEIROS, Appellant, v. RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES OF AMERICA, and Adjustco, Appellees.
CourtCourt of Appeal of Florida (US)

George J. Adler, Orlando, for appellant.

Robert G. Brightman, Orlando, for appellees.

NIMMONS, Judge.

Claimant appeals a workers' compensation order finding that her accident did not arise out of her employment and therefore denying her claim for temporary total disability and other benefits. We affirm.

Claimant, a thirty-five year old woman, sustained injuries in a non-compensable automobile accident on February 10, 1984. This accident resulted in headaches and dizziness. She missed approximately five days of work. She returned to her job as a runner for the employer herein and, on the morning of February 29, 1984, was making her first delivery when she fell on a stairway and injured her knee.

Dr. Bixon, her treating physician, and Mr. Lenhart, her supervisor, both testified that she told them the accident occurred when she became dizzy, blacked out and fell down. Dr. Bixon testified that on February 24, 1984, claimant was unable to perform the heel-to-toe test without becoming dizzy and losing her balance. At the hearing, claimant testified that she had not become dizzy but did not know why she fell. The deputy commissioner ruled that claimant's accident was caused by dizziness from the previous non-work-related automobile accident, and that the present accident did not arise out of claimant's employment.

When a claimant suffers from an idiopathic, or pre-existing, condition which results in injury, the injury is compensable only if the claimant can show that it "arose out of" his employment. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company v. McCook, 355 So.2d 1166, 1168 (Fla.1977), House v. Preferred Auto Leasing, 476 So.2d 1337 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). An injury "arises out of" employment when the employment necessarily exposes the claimant to conditions that substantially contribute to the risk of injury, conditions which the claimant would not normally encounter during his non-employment life. Legakis v. Sultan & Sons, 383 So.2d 938, 940 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980) (held compensable where a vapor spray emitted from a steam press caused claimant to turn her head, thus activating her pre-existing labyrinthitis causing her to fall and injure herself).

The claimant herein has not demonstrated that her physical surroundings on the job in any way contributed to the risk of injury any more than they would have in non-employment life. Although there was evidence that she had no stairs in her own home, there was no evidence that the stairway in any way contributed to the risk of injury, either by tripping on a stairstep or otherwise. On the contrary, the evidence is that she became dizzy, a symptom she had been complaining of since the accident, and fell striking her knee.

The claimant relies in large part upon Lovett v. Gore Newspaper Company, 419 So.2d 306 (Fla.1982) and Cheney v. F.E.C. News Distribution Company, 382 So.2d 1291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). Those cases are distinguishable from the case at bar. In Lovett, the deputy found that the tiled concrete floor was a special and increased hazard to Lovett's pre-existing back condition. The deputy also found that the claimant was required to work two hours beyond her normal eight-hour shift despite her protestations that she was not feeling well. The Supreme Court held that because of these factors it could not fairly be said that Lovett would just as likely have sustained an injury such as the one that occurred if she had been in her own home. 419 So.2d at 308. In Cheney, this court reversed the deputy's denial of benefits because, although the condition which caused Cheney's dizziness did not arise from his job, the activity demanded by his work increased the chances of his becoming dizzy. The activity which Cheney was engaged in at the time of the accident included bending, twisting, and turning necessary to move stacks of magazines which resulted in dizziness, falling, and striking her head on the store's terrazo floor.

On the other hand, in the case at bar, the record supports the deputy's finding that the claimant became dizzy and fell for no reason related to her employment. The facts in this case are closer to those involved in Federal Electric Corp. v. Best, 274 So.2d 886 (Fla.1973). Best was standing in his place of employment when he gasped, fell and struck his head on a desk thereby sustaining head injuries. The cause of his fall was a non-work-related grand mal-type seizure. The Industrial Relations Commission reversed the deputy commissioner's denial of the claim for benefits. However, the Supreme Court reversed the IRC, observing that it found nothing in the record to indicate that the fall was in any way related to Best's job. Id. at 888.

We conclude that there was competent, substantial evidence to support the deputy's finding that the claimant's injury did not arise out of her employment.

AFFIRMED.

McCORD, GUYTE P., Jr., (Ret. Associate Judge), concurs.

ZEHMER, J., dissents with written opinion.

ZEHMER, Judge, dissenting.

I respectfully dissent. I believe the majority has, as did the deputy below, misconstrued and misapplied the law relating to idiopathic or preexisting conditions. In...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • Sedgwick CMS v. Valcourt-Williams
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • April 5, 2019
    ...employment; he would have been there in any event, regardless of whether he had brought his work home"); Medeiros v. Residential Cmtys. of Am. , 481 So.2d 92, 93 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) ; Grenon v. City of Palm Harbor Fire Dist. , 634 So.2d 697, 699 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) ("The employment must, in......
  • Brasington Cadillac-Oldsmobile v. Martin, CADILLAC-OLDSMOBILE and C
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • August 11, 1994
    ...697 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Hillsborough County Sch. Bd. v. Williams, 601 So.2d 624 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Medeiros v. Residential Communities of America, 481 So.2d 92, 93 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) (where an employee has a preexisting condition, a finding of causal connection and compensability requir......
  • Grimes v. Leon County School Bd.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • December 15, 1987
    ...(Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Market Food Distributors, Inc. v. Levenson, 383 So.2d 726 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). In Medeiros v. Residential Communities of America, 481 So.2d 92, 93 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), we stated that such an injury "arises out of" employment "when the employment necessarily exposes the ......
  • Silberberg v. Palm Beach Cnty. Sch. Bd.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • February 16, 2022
    ...of employment duties").11 It could be something like dizziness, labyrinthitis, or epilepsy. See Medeiros v. Residential Cmtys. of Am. , 481 So. 2d 92, 93 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) ; see also Legakis , 383 So. 2d at 939–40 (describing the fall caused by epilepsy in Fed. Elec. Corp. v. Best , 274 S......
  • 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