Clay County Board of County Commissioners/Scibal Associates v. Bramlitt
This text of 61 So. 3d 1239 (Clay County Board of County Commissioners/Scibal Associates v. Bramlitt) 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.
Opinions
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
We deny the Employer/Carrier’s motion for rehearing, but on our own motion, we withdraw our prior opinion and substitute the following in its place.
The Employer/Carrier (E/C) raises two issues in this workers’ compensation appeal, contending the Judge of Compensation Claims erred (1) in concluding that Claimant’s hypertension is compensable, and (2) in ordering the E/C to reimburse Claimant for out-of-pocket medical expenses. We affirm as to the first issue without further comment.
We reverse as to the second issue because Claimant did not file a petition for benefits seeking reimbursement for out-of-pocket medical expenses, and the Judge of Compensation Claims’ finding that the E/C stipulated to determination of the issue is not supported by competent substantial evidence. Due process bars a ruling on matters not at issue because the parties are entitled to notice in order to fairly present their case. See Specialty Risk Servs. v. Fleming, 875 So.2d 742 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Commercial Carrier Corp. v. LaPointe, 723 So.2d 912, 915 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Lakeside Baptist Church v. Jones, 714 So.2d 1188, 1190 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
61 So. 3d 1239, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 8416, 2011 WL 1938235, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clay-county-board-of-county-commissionersscibal-associates-v-bramlitt-fladistctapp-2011.