Phillips v. Pools By Andrew
This text of 620 So. 2d 261 (Phillips v. Pools By Andrew) 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.
Opinion
Albert Phillips appeals from an order of the judge of compensation claims (JCC) which granted the employer/carrier’s motion “to evaluate the claimant to determine the need for, and the kind of service necessary and appropriate to restore the claimant to suitable gainful employment.” We reverse the order of the JCC because there was no evidence presented or factual findings to support the need for the evaluation. See Strawter v. Atlas Steel Fence, Inc., 578 So.2d 455 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Dimirra Dev., Inc. v. Mills, 501 So.2d 63 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987).1
In light of our holding, it is unnecessary for us to address the application of section 440.49(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1990),2 to accidents which occurred prior to October 1, 1989, or the statute’s application to mandated evaluations versus mandated vocational rehabilitation.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
620 So. 2d 261, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 6762, 1993 WL 225640, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phillips-v-pools-by-andrew-fladistctapp-1993.