Frederick v. Times Publishing Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Frederick v. Times Publishing Co.

533 So. 2d 827, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2336, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4566, 1988 WL 106311

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 14, 1988

DocketNo. 88-00015

StatusPublished

This text of 533 So. 2d 827 (Frederick v. Times Publishing Co.) 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

Frederick v. Times Publishing Co., 533 So. 2d 827, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2336, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4566, 1988 WL 106311 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us on appeal from the order of the deputy commissioner awarding an attorney fee for services performed in a medical-only claim for psychiatric care. In his order of November 25, 1987, the deputy awarded certain costs and a fee of $3,500 to claimant’s attorney. Although the deputy stated that he considered the evidence presented, the provisions of Section 440.34, Florida Statutes, and the criteria outlined in Lee Engineering & Construction Co. v. Fellows, 209 So.2d 454 (Fla.1968), he failed to specify the factors relied on to arrive at the $3,500 figure. Further the deputy states that he did not consider Dr. Sprehe’s bills in arriving at the fee because the employer/carrier timely authorized the treatment by that doctor.

We reverse since the deputy’s order does not explain how the factors enumerated in Lee Engineering were applied,¹ and the finding regarding authorization of psychiatric treatment is not supported by competent, substantial evidence. Both Dr. Te-done and Dr. Wayslik determined in January that claimant needed psychiatric testing, and a claim for psychiatric treatment was requested in February of 1986. However, the employer/carrier did not authorize Dr. Sprehe for the needed testing until July 14, 1986.

Accordingly, the order is REVERSED and REMANDED for proceedings consistent herewith.

BOOTH, SHIVERS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us on appeal from the order of the deputy commissioner awarding an attorney fee for services performed in a medical-only claim for psychiatric care. In his order of November 25, 1987, the deputy awarded certain costs and a fee of $3,500 to claimant’s attorney. Although the deputy stated that he considered the evidence presented, the provisions of Section 440.34, Florida Statutes, and the criteria outlined in Lee Engineering & Construction Co. v. Fellows, 209 So.2d 454 (Fla.1968), he failed to specify the factors relied on to arrive at the $3,500 figure. Further the deputy states that he did not consider Dr. Sprehe’s bills in arriving at the fee because the employer/carrier timely authorized the treatment by that doctor.

We reverse since the deputy’s order does not explain how the factors enumerated in Lee Engineering were applied,¹ and the finding regarding authorization of psychiatric treatment is not supported by competent, substantial evidence. Both Dr. Te-done and Dr. Wayslik determined in January that claimant needed psychiatric testing, and a claim for psychiatric treatment was requested in February of 1986. However, the employer/carrier did not authorize Dr. Sprehe for the needed testing until July 14, 1986.

Accordingly, the order is REVERSED and REMANDED for proceedings consistent herewith.

BOOTH, SHIVERS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

533 So. 2d 827, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2336, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4566, 1988 WL 106311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frederick-v-times-publishing-co-fladistctapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack