Garitson v. Rifenburg

380 So. 2d 1311
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMarch 17, 1980
DocketRR-37
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 380 So. 2d 1311 (Garitson v. Rifenburg) 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
Garitson v. Rifenburg, 380 So. 2d 1311 (Fla. Ct. App. 1980).

Opinion

380 So.2d 1311 (1980)

Leslie Faye GARITSON, Appellant,
v.
Anna Marie RIFENBURG, D/B/a Anna Marie's Coffee Shop and Cosmopolitan Mutual Insurance Company, Appellees.

No. RR-37.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 17, 1980.

Richard H. Gaunt, Jr., of the law office of Frank G. Cibula, Jr., West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Albert P. Massey, III, of Pyszka, Kessler & Adams, Fort Lauderdale, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

The deputy commissioner ruled that the carrier was not responsible for the claimant's past medical treatment because there was no request for medical benefits. The record does not support this finding. The claimant, in her claim letter and at the commencement of the hearing, requested the payment of past medical bills and future medical attention. The carrier never controverted these payments, but relied upon the general defense that the claim was not compensable. The record supports no conclusion other than that the claimant saw a doctor of her choice at the employer's suggestion. The issue of compensability having been decided in favor of the claimant and the medical bills having never been controverted, said bills are the responsibility of the carrier. The deputy's ruling to the contrary is reversed.

We note additional error in the deputy commissioner's failure to rule on the claim for temporary partial disability benefits from June 13, 1979 through July 11, 1979. This issue was ripe for adjudication and properly before the deputy. The order is accordingly reversed on this point and the cause is remanded to the deputy with directions that he enter an order consistent with this opinion. Action Pool Builders, Inc. v. Grant, IRC Order 2-3743 (March 23, 1979).

ERVIN, SHIVERS and SHAW, JJ., concur.

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

Related

S.N. Knights & Sons v. Martin
533 So. 2d 959 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Saveway Barber & Beauty Supplies v. Gulyas
410 So. 2d 632 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)
Flanigan's Enterprises, Inc. v. Pont
395 So. 2d 1217 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Poole & Kent Company v. Asbell
394 So. 2d 1112 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
George L. Simonds Co. v. Graham
395 So. 2d 1190 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
380 So. 2d 1311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garitson-v-rifenburg-fladistctapp-1980.