City of Tampa v. Thompson

District Court of Appeal of Florida

City of Tampa v. Thompson

923 So. 2d 558, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 3729, 2006 WL 658859

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 17, 2006

DocketNo. 1D05-4094

StatusPublished

This text of 923 So. 2d 558 (City of Tampa v. Thompson) 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. Thompson, 923 So. 2d 558, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 3729, 2006 WL 658859 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Because it is clear in this workers’ compensation case that a conflict existed be[559]*559tween the opinion of claimant’s treating physician, Dr. Guttentag, and the opinion of the employer’s and servicing agent’s independent medical examiner, Dr. Kneze-vich, on the issue of causation, the judge of compensation claims committed reversible error when he denied the employer’s and servicing agent’s request for appointment of an expert medical advisor. See, e.g., Broward Children’s Ctr., Inc. v. Hall, 859 So.2d 623, 627 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (“the clear intent of section 440.13(9)(c) is to require participation of an expert medical advisor in every case where a disagreement exists between healthcare providers”). Accordingly, we reverse the final order awarding benefits and remand with instructions that the judge of compensation claims appoint an expert medical ad-visor as requested by the employer and servicing agent.

REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.

WEBSTER, DAVIS and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Because it is clear in this workers’ compensation case that a conflict existed be[559]*559tween the opinion of claimant’s treating physician, Dr. Guttentag, and the opinion of the employer’s and servicing agent’s independent medical examiner, Dr. Kneze-vich, on the issue of causation, the judge of compensation claims committed reversible error when he denied the employer’s and servicing agent’s request for appointment of an expert medical advisor. See, e.g., Broward Children’s Ctr., Inc. v. Hall, 859 So.2d 623, 627 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (“the clear intent of section 440.13(9)(c) is to require participation of an expert medical advisor in every case where a disagreement exists between healthcare providers”). Accordingly, we reverse the final order awarding benefits and remand with instructions that the judge of compensation claims appoint an expert medical ad-visor as requested by the employer and servicing agent.

REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.

WEBSTER, DAVIS and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

923 So. 2d 558, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 3729, 2006 WL 658859, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-tampa-v-thompson-fladistctapp-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack