Groseclose v. Optimum Oncology-Comprehensive Cancer Center
This text of 210 So. 3d 690 (Groseclose v. Optimum Oncology-Comprehensive Cancer Center) 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.
Opinion
In this workers’ compensation case, Claimant appeals an order of the Judge of [691]*691Compensation Claims (JCC) denying permanent total disability (PTD) benefits and associated penalties, interest, costs, and attorney’s fees. Because neither the parties nor the JCC had the benefit of Westphal v. City of St. Petersburg/St. Petersburg Risk Management and State of Florida, 122 So.3d 440 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013), and the considerations therein thus were not addressed below, we reverse the order, and remand the case for further proceedings. See generally City of Pensacola v. Capital Realty Holding Co., 417 So.2d 687, 688 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (“It is well settled that upon reversal and remand with general directions for further proceedings, a trial judge is vested with broad discretion in handling or directing the course of the cause thereafter.”).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
210 So. 3d 690, 2013 WL 5744560, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 16897, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/groseclose-v-optimum-oncology-comprehensive-cancer-center-fladistctapp-2013.