Haynes v. World Color Press

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Haynes v. World Color Press

794 So. 2d 674, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 11399, 2001 WL 910101

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 14, 2001

DocketNo. 1D00-1676

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 794 So. 2d 674 (Haynes v. World Color Press) 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

Haynes v. World Color Press, 794 So. 2d 674, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 11399, 2001 WL 910101 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Appellant-claimant, Lillie Haynes, essentially raises two issues on appeal. First, claimant contends that there is no competent, substantial evidence (CSE) to support the finding by the judge of compensations claims (JCC) that she had a syncopal episode, that is, fainted, rather than slipped on water, and that her fall was the result of that syncopal episode. Second, she contends that even if she did faint, the JCC erred in finding her injury was not compensable, because her employment exposed her to a risk of injury greater than that which she would have normally encountered in her nonemployment life. See and compare Foxworth v. Florida Indus. Comm’n, 86 So.2d 147, 151 (Fla.1955) (“It is well settled that injuries which arise out of risks or conditions personal to the claimant do not arise out of the employment unless the employment contributes to the risk or aggravates the injury.”); Protectu Awning Shutter Co. v. Cline, 154 Fla. 30, 16 So.2d 342 (Fla.1944) (awarding benefits in connection with an injury that occurred when the employee fell because of a heart condition onto a concrete floor while at work, fracturing his skull resulting in death).

We affirm as to the first issue, because there is CSE in the medical records that appellant suffered a syncopal episode, which resulted in the fall. As to the second issue, we decline to reach it because the issue was not properly preserved for appeal. Claimant did not present any claim or argument below to the effect that even if she suffered a syncopal episode, the injury was nonetheless compensable because the concrete floor upon which she fell, or the machine in which her leg was entangled, created an increased hazard that contributed to the risk or aggravated her injury.

AFFIRMED.

WEBSTER and BENTON, JJ., concur, ERVIN concurs and dissents with opinion.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant-claimant, Lillie Haynes, essentially raises two issues on appeal. First, claimant contends that there is no competent, substantial evidence (CSE) to support the finding by the judge of compensations claims (JCC) that she had a syncopal episode, that is, fainted, rather than slipped on water, and that her fall was the result of that syncopal episode. Second, she contends that even if she did faint, the JCC erred in finding her injury was not compensable, because her employment exposed her to a risk of injury greater than that which she would have normally encountered in her nonemployment life. See and compare Foxworth v. Florida Indus. Comm’n, 86 So.2d 147, 151 (Fla.1955) (“It is well settled that injuries which arise out of risks or conditions personal to the claimant do not arise out of the employment unless the employment contributes to the risk or aggravates the injury.”); Protectu Awning Shutter Co. v. Cline, 154 Fla. 30, 16 So.2d 342 (Fla.1944) (awarding benefits in connection with an injury that occurred when the employee fell because of a heart condition onto a concrete floor while at work, fracturing his skull resulting in death).

We affirm as to the first issue, because there is CSE in the medical records that appellant suffered a syncopal episode, which resulted in the fall. As to the second issue, we decline to reach it because the issue was not properly preserved for appeal. Claimant did not present any claim or argument below to the effect that even if she suffered a syncopal episode, the injury was nonetheless compensable because the concrete floor upon which she fell, or the machine in which her leg was entangled, created an increased hazard that contributed to the risk or aggravated her injury.

AFFIRMED.

WEBSTER and BENTON, JJ., concur, ERVIN concurs and dissents with opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

794 So. 2d 674, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 11399, 2001 WL 910101, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haynes-v-world-color-press-fladistctapp-2001.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack