Parave v. Tri County Security, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Parave v. Tri County Security, Inc.

737 So. 2d 637, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 10052, 1999 WL 546959

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 29, 1999

DocketNo. 98-2670

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 737 So. 2d 637 (Parave v. Tri County Security, Inc.) 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

Parave v. Tri County Security, Inc., 737 So. 2d 637, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 10052, 1999 WL 546959 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

In the workers’ compensation order under review, the claimant was awarded twenty-four hour per day nonprofessional attendant care. He asserts on appeal that the judge of compensation claims erred, however, in ruling that the claimant’s fiancee could not be compensated for being on call during the eight hours per night in which he slept. In light of the particular facts of this case, including the claimant’s specific needs during his hours of sleep, the judge of compensation claims was justified in finding that the fiancee’s activities during these hours did not go beyond her normal household activities, and therefore did not qualify as compensable nonprofessional attendant care. The order is accordingly affirmed.

ALLEN and KAHN, JJ., CONCUR. JOANOS, J., DISSENTS WITH WRITTEN OPINION.

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

PER CURIAM.

In the workers’ compensation order under review, the claimant was awarded twenty-four hour per day nonprofessional attendant care. He asserts on appeal that the judge of compensation claims erred, however, in ruling that the claimant’s fiancee could not be compensated for being on call during the eight hours per night in which he slept. In light of the particular facts of this case, including the claimant’s specific needs during his hours of sleep, the judge of compensation claims was justified in finding that the fiancee’s activities during these hours did not go beyond her normal household activities, and therefore did not qualify as compensable nonprofessional attendant care. The order is accordingly affirmed.

ALLEN and KAHN, JJ., CONCUR. JOANOS, J., DISSENTS WITH WRITTEN OPINION.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

737 So. 2d 637, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 10052, 1999 WL 546959, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parave-v-tri-county-security-inc-fladistctapp-1999.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack