Bell Rentals and Sales v. Harvey

405 So. 2d 289
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedOctober 30, 1981
DocketYY-312
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 405 So. 2d 289 (Bell Rentals and Sales v. Harvey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bell Rentals and Sales v. Harvey, 405 So. 2d 289 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981).

Opinion

405 So.2d 289 (1981)

BELL RENTALS AND SALES and Travelers Insurance Company, Appellants,
v.
John HARVEY and Gulf American Fire & Casualty Company, Appellees.

No. YY-312.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

October 30, 1981.

*290 Robert G. Brightman, Orlando, for appellants.

Thomas R. Mooney of Meyers, Mooney & Adler, P.A.; Robert C. Barrett of Akerman, Senterfitt & Eidson, Orlando, for appellees.

MILLS, Judge.

This is the second appearance of this workers' compensation case here.

Bell and Travelers contend the deputy erred in failing to find that claimant reached maximum medical improvement after his second accident and in ordering them to provide further medical treatment. We disagree and affirm.

In his first order appealed here, Bell, et al. v. Harvey, 387 So.2d 507 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), the deputy did not rule on maximum medical improvement following the second accident. Bell and Travelers did not urge this as error. They may not do this now. The deputy's initial order awarded remedial treatment. We affirmed this holding of the deputy. Bell and Travelers did not challenge the deputy's holding or our opinion. It may not do so now. Brevard Board of County Commissioners v. Caldwell, 379 So.2d 1031 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980).

In the prior Bell case, we held that medical costs are never apportionable between carriers. We recede from that opinion because before and after the prior Bell case we held that medical costs may be apportioned between carriers. This we reaffirm. Rowe and Mitchell v. Rodgers, 378 So.2d 1281 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); The Seasons from Sarasota v. O'Day, 379 So.2d 1024 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); and Neff, et al. v. Bretts, et al., 404 So.2d 416 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).

AFFIRMED.

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C.J., and McCORD, ERVIN, BOOTH, LARRY G. SMITH, SHIVERS, SHAW, WENTWORTH, JOANOS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Florida Insurance Guaranty Ass'n v. Fibercon Industries, Inc.
491 So. 2d 566 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Flagship National Bank of Broward County v. Hinkle
479 So. 2d 828 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
FLAGSHIP NAT. BK. OF BROWARD v. Hinkle
479 So. 2d 828 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Structural Systems, Inc. v. Worthen
463 So. 2d 502 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Ebasco Services, Inc. v. Mohrbeck
430 So. 2d 543 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
405 So. 2d 289, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bell-rentals-and-sales-v-harvey-fladistctapp-1981.