Sabal Transport v. Brooks
| Decision Date | 26 January 1996 |
| Docket Number | No. 95-636,95-636 |
| Parties | 21 Fla. L. Weekly D262 SABAL TRANSPORT and the Claims Center, Appellant, v. James D. BROOKS, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
E. Taylor Davidson of Dicesare & Davidson, P.A., Lakeland, for appellant.
Susan W. Fox of MacFarlane, Ausley, Ferguson & McMullen, Tampa, and H. Guy Smith of Smith & Brunetti, P.A., Lakeland, for appellee.
In this workers' compensation case, the employer/carrier (E/C) appeal an order awarding benefits to the claimant, James D. Brooks. We affirm without discussion two of the three points raised by the E/C. We also affirm the third point on appeal because, contrary to the E/C's assertion, the judge of compensation claims (JCC) did not err in allowing Brooks to include in the pretrial stipulation claims not included in the original claim for benefits.
On December 16, 1993, Brooks filed a Claim for Benefits seeking permanent total disability (PTD). In the pretrial stipulation filed with the JCC on August 22, 1994, Brooks included, in addition to the PTD claim, claims for correction of his average weekly wage (AWW) as well as medical care and treatment provided by Dr. Arturo Gonzalez and Dr. Robert Martinez. The E/C then filed a Motion to Dismiss Claims for Average Weekly Wage and Medical Care Included in the Pre-Trial Stipulation. In the motion, the E/C asserted that Brooks had not filed a request for assistance and had not exhausted the procedures for informal dispute resolution as provided in section 440.191, Florida Statutes (Supp.1994), regarding the AWW and medical claims.
At the hearing, however, the JCC allowed the AWW and medical issues to proceed as they were sufficiently connected to the original claim, PTD. The JCC also indicated that he would allow the E/C additional time to conduct discovery and present evidence concerning those two issues. In the order, the JCC found that the treatment provided by Dr. Gonzalez and Dr. Martinez was reasonable and medically necessary and that the E/C had timely notice of the claim for the care provided by Dr. Gonzalez and Dr. Martinez as of March 9, 1994. The JCC thus found the E/C responsible for the past, present, and continuing care and treatment of Brooks provided by Dr. Gonzalez and Dr. Martinez. The JCC also found that the E/C had adequate notice prior to trial that the AWW was at issue and therefore determined the correct AWW.
We find that the JCC acted properly in adjudicating...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Commercial Carrier Corp. v. LaPointe, 97-2631.
...having been the subject of a request for assistance and a petition for benefits, are properly at issue. See Sabal Transp. v. Brooks, 666 So.2d 1032, 1033 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). Comcar contends, however, that the subsequent adoption of Florida Rule of Workers' Compensation 4.028(5)(b) undermin......
-
Lakeside Baptist Church v. Jones
...in the parties' stipulation can be considered even if it was not identified in the petition for benefits. See, Sabal Transport v. Brooks, 666 So.2d 1032 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); McCabe v. Bechtel Power Corp., 645 So.2d 1065 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). However, the pretrial stipulation in this case doe......
-
CHURCH v. DURAN
...So.2d 464, 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (holding issues in workers' compensation cases may be tried by consent); cf. Sabal Transp. v. Brooks, 666 So.2d 1032 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (holding claim first raised in pretrial stipulation was properly before the JCC). AFFIRMED as modified. KAHN, ROWE, and......