Gory Associated Industries v. Thomas

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Gory Associated Industries v. Thomas

402 So. 2d 1341, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20968

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 2, 1981

DocketNo. YY-420

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 402 So. 2d 1341 (Gory Associated Industries v. Thomas) 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

Gory Associated Industries v. Thomas, 402 So. 2d 1341, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20968 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this appeal from a workers’ compensation order, the employer/carrier challenge the adequacy of the notice of injury, the award of temporary partial disability during the period the claimant Gene Thomas was employed (part-time), and the award of medical expenses. We affirm the order of the deputy commissioner on the first two points because there is competent, substantial evidence to support those determinations. On the issue of medical expenses, however, we reverse and remand for further proceedings for the reasons explained below.

At issue on the question of payment of medical expenses is the failure of the hospital and the attending physician to timely file medical reports. Section 440.13(1), Florida Statutes. The deputy commissioner’s order excuses the failure to timely file the reports based on the fact that the medical treatment was “reasonable and necessary” and “the circumstances involved.” It must be presumed from the context of the order that the phrase “the circumstances involved” refers to the fact that the employer/carrier refused to provide medical services. In Broward Industrial Plating, Inc. v. Weiby, 394 So.2d 1117 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), this court held that the refusal to provide medical services is not good cause which excuses the failure to timely submit the required reports, nor is the fact that a claim is being contested sufficient to constitute good cause. See also, St. Francis Hospital v. Feinberg, 192 So.2d 753 (Fla.1966). Furthermore, an excusal based solely on the finding that the medical treatment was “reasonable and necessary” is also insufficient. Broward Industrial Plating, Inc. v. Weiby, supra. Accordingly, we must remand this cause for appropriate findings as to whether there was good cause to excuse the failure to comply with the statutory reporting requirements.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED for further proceedings.

MILLS, ERVIN and LARRY G. SMITH, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this appeal from a workers’ compensation order, the employer/carrier challenge the adequacy of the notice of injury, the award of temporary partial disability during the period the claimant Gene Thomas was employed (part-time), and the award of medical expenses. We affirm the order of the deputy commissioner on the first two points because there is competent, substantial evidence to support those determinations. On the issue of medical expenses, however, we reverse and remand for further proceedings for the reasons explained below.

At issue on the question of payment of medical expenses is the failure of the hospital and the attending physician to timely file medical reports. Section 440.13(1), Florida Statutes. The deputy commissioner’s order excuses the failure to timely file the reports based on the fact that the medical treatment was “reasonable and necessary” and “the circumstances involved.” It must be presumed from the context of the order that the phrase “the circumstances involved” refers to the fact that the employer/carrier refused to provide medical services. In Broward Industrial Plating, Inc. v. Weiby, 394 So.2d 1117 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), this court held that the refusal to provide medical services is not good cause which excuses the failure to timely submit the required reports, nor is the fact that a claim is being contested sufficient to constitute good cause. See also, St. Francis Hospital v. Feinberg, 192 So.2d 753 (Fla.1966). Furthermore, an excusal based solely on the finding that the medical treatment was “reasonable and necessary” is also insufficient. Broward Industrial Plating, Inc. v. Weiby, supra. Accordingly, we must remand this cause for appropriate findings as to whether there was good cause to excuse the failure to comply with the statutory reporting requirements.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED for further proceedings.

MILLS, ERVIN and LARRY G. SMITH, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

402 So. 2d 1341, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 20968, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gory-associated-industries-v-thomas-fladistctapp-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack