Kemper Insurance Companies-Tampa V. Macleod

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kemper Insurance Companies-Tampa V. Macleod

845 So. 2d 241, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 5440, 28 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 993

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 16, 2003·No. No. 1D02-1696·Published

Opinion

WOLF, J.

We determine that the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) erred in admitting the testimony of the doctor who was not a medical advisor, independent medical examiner, or authorized treating provider. See Gallagher Bassett v. Laber, 722 So.2d 834 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). However, we determine that this error was harmless in light of the JCC’s determination that the employer/carrier was precluded from challenging compensability pursuant to section 440.20(4), Florida Statutes (2001). See Franklin v. Northwest Airlines, 778 So.2d 418 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).

Affirmed.

ERVIN and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

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

WOLF, J.

We determine that the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) erred in admitting the testimony of the doctor who was not a medical advisor, independent medical examiner, or authorized treating provider. See Gallagher Bassett v. Laber, 722 So.2d 834 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). However, we determine that this error was harmless in light of the JCC’s determination that the employer/carrier was precluded from challenging compensability pursuant to section 440.20(4), Florida Statutes (2001). See Franklin v. Northwest Airlines, 778 So.2d 418 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).

Affirmed.

ERVIN and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

Kemper Insurance Companies-Tampa V. Macleod, 845 So. 2d 241, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 5440, 28 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 993 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

845 So. 2d 241 (Kemper Insurance Companies-Tampa V. Macleod) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related