Brandon v. Hillsborough County School Board

447 So. 2d 982, 16 Educ. L. Rep. 1435, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 12259
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMarch 19, 1984
DocketNo. AS-90
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 447 So. 2d 982 (Brandon v. Hillsborough County School Board) 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
Brandon v. Hillsborough County School Board, 447 So. 2d 982, 16 Educ. L. Rep. 1435, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 12259 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Opinions

WENTWORTH, Judge.

Claimant seeks review of a workers’ compensation order by which his claim for [983]*983wage loss benefits was denied. We conclude that the deputy did not err in finding that claimant failed to establish a permanent impairment which would warrant an award of wage loss benefits, and we therefore affirm the order appealed.

Claimant sustained a low back injury while lifting a concrete block, and testified that he continues to experience pain. The injury was diagnosed as a lumbar strain, and medical testimony indicates that upon maximum medical improvement claimant was without identifiable indicia of any physical impairment. The deputy expressly found that claimant’s pre-existing medical restrictions were “not entirely clear from the record” and that:

... claimant has failed to prove any permanent impairment in accordance with § 440.15(3)(a)3, Florida Statutes,_ It is reasonably clear to me from Dr. Wasy-lik’s testimony and from review of the American Medical Association Guide to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment that the injury of which the claimant complains is covered under the Guides, and that [claimant] does not have any permanent physical impairment.

Unlike Trindade v. Abbey Road Beef ’N Booze, 443 So.2d 1007 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983), the present case is not one in which “permanent impairment cannot reasonably be determined under the criteria utilized in the Guides, in which event such permanent impairment may be established under other generally accepted medical criteria .... ” And even were this a proper instance for utilization of other medical criteria, the record in the present case provides competent substantial evidence, independent of the Guides, to support the deputy’s explicit finding that claimant has sustained no permanent physical impairment cognizable under § 440.15(3), Florida Statutes.

The order appealed is affirmed.

NIMMONS, J., specially concurs with opinion. ZEHMER, J., dissents with opinion.

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

Related

Martin County School Bd. v. McDaniel
465 So. 2d 1235 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
447 So. 2d 982, 16 Educ. L. Rep. 1435, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 12259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brandon-v-hillsborough-county-school-board-fladistctapp-1984.