Moore v. Hillsborough County School Board

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Moore v. Hillsborough County School Board

832 So. 2d 134, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 14305, 2002 WL 31202141

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 4, 2002

DocketNo. 1D01-1123

StatusPublished

This text of 832 So. 2d 134 (Moore v. Hillsborough County School Board) 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

Moore v. Hillsborough County School Board, 832 So. 2d 134, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 14305, 2002 WL 31202141 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Victoria J. Moore appeals a workers’ compensation order in which the judge denied her claim for impairment benefits. She contends that the judge erred in determining that she was not entitled to the benefits because she voluntarily limited her income. Under section 440.15(3)(a)3., Florida Statutes (Supp.1994), “[a]n employee’s entitlement to impairment income benefits begins the day after the employee reaches maximum medical improvement or the expiration of temporary benefits, whichever occurs earlier.... ” The judge found that the claimant reached MMI on November 30,1998, with an overall impairment rating of thirteen percent, and determined that she would be entitled to impairment benefits as of December 1, 1998, but for her voluntary limitation of income.

We agree the voluntary limitation of income does not bar entitlement to impairment income benefits under section 440.15(3)(a). Accordingly, the portion of the order denying impairment benefits is reversed, and the case is remanded.

We find no error as to any other points on appeal.

[135]*135AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; and REMANDED.

ERVIN, WOLF and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Victoria J. Moore appeals a workers’ compensation order in which the judge denied her claim for impairment benefits. She contends that the judge erred in determining that she was not entitled to the benefits because she voluntarily limited her income. Under section 440.15(3)(a)3., Florida Statutes (Supp.1994), “[a]n employee’s entitlement to impairment income benefits begins the day after the employee reaches maximum medical improvement or the expiration of temporary benefits, whichever occurs earlier.... ” The judge found that the claimant reached MMI on November 30,1998, with an overall impairment rating of thirteen percent, and determined that she would be entitled to impairment benefits as of December 1, 1998, but for her voluntary limitation of income.

We agree the voluntary limitation of income does not bar entitlement to impairment income benefits under section 440.15(3)(a). Accordingly, the portion of the order denying impairment benefits is reversed, and the case is remanded.

We find no error as to any other points on appeal.

[135]*135AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; and REMANDED.

ERVIN, WOLF and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

832 So. 2d 134, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 14305, 2002 WL 31202141, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moore-v-hillsborough-county-school-board-fladistctapp-2002.