Fairchild Industries, Inc. v. Sievers

447 So. 2d 393, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 12266
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 19, 1984·No. No. AU-329·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

WENTWORTH, Judge.

Employer/carrier seek review of a workers’ compensation order by which claimant was awarded permanent total disability benefits. We find that the deputy properly excused claimant from the requirement of a work search, and we therefore affirm the order appealed.

While claimant is neither continuously bedridden nor otherwise totally physically incapacitated, the record contains clear medical evidence of claimant’s patent inability to uninterruptedly maintain any gainful employment. In such circumstances an effort to find employment would be a futile and useless gesture, and the deputy properly excused claimant from the requirement of a work search as a predicate for disability benefits. See Sizemore v. Canaveral Port Authority, 332 So.2d 23 (Fla.1976); Chicken TV Things v. Murray, 329 So.2d 302 (Fla.1976); see generally Red Oak Farms Inc. v. Scott, 408 So.2d 841 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).

The order appealed is affirmed.

MILLS, J., and McCORD, Jr. (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.

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

Fairchild Industries, Inc. v. Sievers, 447 So. 2d 393, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 12266 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

447 So. 2d 393 (Fairchild Industries, Inc. v. Sievers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Philpot v. City of Miami
541 So. 2d 680 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Bill's Equipment and Rentals v. Teel
498 So. 2d 536 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Alexandre v. Excel Handbags, Inc.
479 So. 2d 286 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)