Gray v. Department of Corrections

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Gray v. Department of Corrections

918 So. 2d 322, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 17527, 2005 WL 2921959

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 7, 2005

DocketNo. 1D04-803

StatusPublished

This text of 918 So. 2d 322 (Gray v. Department of Corrections) 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

Gray v. Department of Corrections, 918 So. 2d 322, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 17527, 2005 WL 2921959 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Ronald Gray, claimant, appeals from an order denying workers’ compensation benefits for a heart attack he suffered on December 31, 2002, while employed as a corrections probation officer. The Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) concluded that claimant was not entitled to the statutory presumption of compensability provided to law enforcement officers for disabling heart disease because claimant’s pre-employment physical revealed evidence of heart disease. See § 112.18(1), Fla. Stat. (2002). This court has recently held that “a correctional officer’s entitlement to the statutory presumption is not conditioned upon proof that he or she successfully passed a pre-employment physical which failed to reveal evidence of the ultimately disabling or fatal heart ... condition.” State v. Reese, 911 So.2d 1291 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). Applying the Reese holding, we reverse the JCC’s determination that Gray was not entitled to the statutory presumption of compensability. We do not reverse outright, however, and remand the case for further proceedings on the question of whether appellees can defeat presumed compensability.

REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.

KAHN, C.J., VAN NORTWICK and HAWKES, JJ, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Ronald Gray, claimant, appeals from an order denying workers’ compensation benefits for a heart attack he suffered on December 31, 2002, while employed as a corrections probation officer. The Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) concluded that claimant was not entitled to the statutory presumption of compensability provided to law enforcement officers for disabling heart disease because claimant’s pre-employment physical revealed evidence of heart disease. See § 112.18(1), Fla. Stat. (2002). This court has recently held that “a correctional officer’s entitlement to the statutory presumption is not conditioned upon proof that he or she successfully passed a pre-employment physical which failed to reveal evidence of the ultimately disabling or fatal heart ... condition.” State v. Reese, 911 So.2d 1291 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). Applying the Reese holding, we reverse the JCC’s determination that Gray was not entitled to the statutory presumption of compensability. We do not reverse outright, however, and remand the case for further proceedings on the question of whether appellees can defeat presumed compensability.

REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.

KAHN, C.J., VAN NORTWICK and HAWKES, JJ, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

918 So. 2d 322, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 17527, 2005 WL 2921959, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gray-v-department-of-corrections-fladistctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack