Nettina v. City of Pembroke Pines (Fire Department)

51 So. 3d 497, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 18996, 2010 WL 4836985
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 30, 2010·No. No. 1D09-6463·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the Judge of Compensation Claims’ (JCC’s) denial of all benefits requested by Claimant. The JCC properly denied the request for authorization of a cardiologist to treat Claimant’s hypertension on the basis that Claimant failed to prove further evaluation and treatment by a cardiologist was medically necessary. We note, however, that the JCC’s alternative basis for denying the benefits claimed is contrary to City of Pembroke Pines v. Ortagus, 50 So.3d 31 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010), holding that once compensability is established, entitlement to medical benefits is not limited to the period of disability.

AFFIRMED.

DAVIS, HAWKES, and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

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

Nettina v. City of Pembroke Pines (Fire Department), 51 So. 3d 497, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 18996, 2010 WL 4836985 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

51 So. 3d 497 (Nettina v. City of Pembroke Pines (Fire Department)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

City of Pembroke Pines v. Ortagus
50 So. 3d 31 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)