Diamond Restaurant v. Clark

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Diamond Restaurant v. Clark

565 So. 2d 380, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 6231, 1990 WL 115540

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 8, 1990

DocketNo. 90-332

StatusPublished

This text of 565 So. 2d 380 (Diamond Restaurant v. Clark) 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

Diamond Restaurant v. Clark, 565 So. 2d 380, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 6231, 1990 WL 115540 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

SHIVERS, Chief Judge.

The employer/carrier appeal a workers’ compensation order requiring them to pay the outstanding and future medical bills of Dr. Suarez. In his order, the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) stated “I find, based upon a written stipulation between the parties, that Dr. Suarez was previously authorized by the carrier to provide the claimant with future medical treatment and care.” Despite claimant’s urging, the JCC’s basis for finding Dr. Suarez authorized is not independent of the attempted settlement agreement.

This court’s reversal of Clark v. Diamond Restaurant, 564 So.2d 1201 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) in effect, dissolved the parties’ attempted settlement agreement and rendered its terms binding on no one. Since the JCC’s order is founded on that agreement, it too must be reversed.

JOANOS and MINER, JJ., concur.

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

SHIVERS, Chief Judge.

The employer/carrier appeal a workers’ compensation order requiring them to pay the outstanding and future medical bills of Dr. Suarez. In his order, the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) stated “I find, based upon a written stipulation between the parties, that Dr. Suarez was previously authorized by the carrier to provide the claimant with future medical treatment and care.” Despite claimant’s urging, the JCC’s basis for finding Dr. Suarez authorized is not independent of the attempted settlement agreement.

This court’s reversal of Clark v. Diamond Restaurant, 564 So.2d 1201 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) in effect, dissolved the parties’ attempted settlement agreement and rendered its terms binding on no one. Since the JCC’s order is founded on that agreement, it too must be reversed.

JOANOS and MINER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

565 So. 2d 380, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 6231, 1990 WL 115540, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/diamond-restaurant-v-clark-fladistctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack