Dalzell v. Mercy Hospital
This text of 697 So. 2d 537 (Dalzell v. Mercy Hospital) 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
The JCC was entitled to reject the opinion of the only physician who testified that the claimant’s disability was work-related. This witness, a Dr. Wand, formed his opinion without the benefit of existing base line information (which he did look over af-terwards). Even more disconcerting, Dr. Wand certified that the claimant’s problems were not job-related in submitting bills to her health insurer. His testimony as to causation was impeached on this basis. The JCC was under no legal obligation to accept Dr. Wand’s self-serving explanation for the inconsistent positions he took.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
697 So. 2d 537, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 7208, 1997 WL 345326, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dalzell-v-mercy-hospital-fladistctapp-1997.