Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Hartzog v. New York Yankees

Hartzog v. New York Yankees

847 So. 2d 1115, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 9461, 2003 WL 21401268
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJune 19, 2003
DocketNo. 1D02-1412
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 847 So. 2d 1115 (Hartzog v. New York Yankees) 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
Hartzog v. New York Yankees, 847 So. 2d 1115, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 9461, 2003 WL 21401268 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Aaron C. Hartzog, Jr., received skilled services provided by a physician in October 1999, and therefore, he received “remedial treatment or attention” as defined by the relevant workers’ compensation statute in effect at the time he was injured, section 440.19(l)(c), Florida Statutes (1991).1 As such, under the specific facts of this case, the Judge of Compensation Claims erred in denying appellant’s claim based on the statute of limitations, section 440.19(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1991).

We reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

BARFIELD, WOLF and DAVIS, JJ., concur.

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

Related

MILLENNIUM GROUP I, LLC v. Attorneys Title Ins. Fund, Inc.
847 So. 2d 1115 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
847 So. 2d 1115, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 9461, 2003 WL 21401268, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hartzog-v-new-york-yankees-fladistctapp-2003.