Botanical Gardens v. Smith

340 So. 2d 913, 1976 Fla. LEXIS 4611
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedSeptember 30, 1976
DocketNo. 48337
StatusPublished

This text of 340 So. 2d 913 (Botanical Gardens v. Smith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Botanical Gardens v. Smith, 340 So. 2d 913, 1976 Fla. LEXIS 4611 (Fla. 1976).

Opinions

BOYD, Justice.

We here review by certiorari a decision of the Industrial Relations Commission. We have jurisdiction under Article V, Section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution.

Claimant Smith suffered a right inguinal hernia and a lumbosacral sprain from the same accident. Temporary total disability benefits were paid beginning July 30, 1974. On August 13, 1974 hernia surgery was performed. The carrier continued to pay temporary total disability benefits until December 17, 1974, well beyond six weeks after the hernia surgery.

Claimant sought payment of an additional six weeks of compensation relying on Section 440.15(6)(f), Florida Statutes, which provides:

“Compensation shall be paid for a period of six weeks from the date of the [hernia] operation.”

Despite the fact that for more than six weeks following the hernia surgery claimant was receiving temporary total disability benefits for the back injury, the Judge of Industrial Claims awarded the hernia compensation benefits. The Industrial Relations Commission affirmed by short form order with Commissioner Friday dissenting.

Commissioner Friday stated in his dissent that if claimant was allowed to receive the benefits of Section 440.15(6)(f), Florida Statutes, in addition to temporary disability benefits for his back injury, the question of when the former benefits should be paid would arise. He declined to reach this “vexatious” question because he did not think claimant should be entitled to recovery of both benefits.

We agree with Commissioner Friday. Claimant should not be entitled to multiple recovery.

The decision of the Industrial Relations Commission is reversed and the cause remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

It is so ordered.

OVERTON, C. J., and SUNDBERG, J., concur. ENGLAND, J., concurs with an opinion. ROBERTS and ADKINS, JJ., dissent.

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

Related

Corral v. McCrory Corporation
228 So. 2d 900 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1969)
Market v. Lutz
126 So. 2d 881 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1961)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
340 So. 2d 913, 1976 Fla. LEXIS 4611, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/botanical-gardens-v-smith-fla-1976.