City of Tampa v. Morales

423 So. 2d 571, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21932
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 17, 1982
DocketNo. AK-478
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 423 So. 2d 571 (City of Tampa v. Morales) 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
City of Tampa v. Morales, 423 So. 2d 571, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21932 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

Opinion

McCORD, Judge.

Appellant, employer, appeals the deputy commissioner’s order granting appellee’s petition for modification based on a change in condition and directing appellant to pay costs and appellee’s attorney’s fees. We reverse.

The deputy commissioner relied upon the testimony of Dr. Peter B. Dunne in reaching his conclusion that appellee had suffered a change in condition sufficient to support a modification. He thereupon changed appellee’s permanent disability rating from 18 percent to 20 percent. Appellant had already paid permanent disability benefits in excess of 20 percent. Therefore, no further compensation was due as a result of the modification.

Dr. Dunn’s testimony does not support a finding that there has been a substantial change in condition that was not anticipated at the time of the original diagnosis. In his testimony, Dr. Dunne stated several times that appellee’s condition had not substantially changed and that at the time of the original diagnosis, he knew that the changes that had occurred very possibly would occur. Compare General Electric Company v. Osborne, 394 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), in which the court stated:

The change of condition provision [Section 440.28, Florida Statutes] is designed [572]*572to afford relief to a claimant whose condition either becomes progressively worse when not anticipated by the original diagnosis or is the product of evidentiary factors not known at the time of the initial claim proceeding. (Citations omitted.)

Because no substantial change in condition was proven, the award of attorney’s fees and costs is also reversed.

REVERSED.

BOOTH and WENTWORTH JJ., concur.

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

Related

Starkman v. Bechtel Power Corp.
588 So. 2d 304 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
423 So. 2d 571, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21932, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-tampa-v-morales-fladistctapp-1982.