Powers v. Berti-Ferguson of Florida

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Powers v. Berti-Ferguson of Florida

510 So. 2d 1185, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1971, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 9774

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 12, 1987

DocketNo. BP-168

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 510 So. 2d 1185 (Powers v. Berti-Ferguson of Florida) 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

Powers v. Berti-Ferguson of Florida, 510 So. 2d 1185, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1971, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 9774 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

WENTWORTH, Judge.

Upon appeal by claimant, we affirm a workers’ compensation order denying a wage loss claim for lack of proof of causal relation to the compensable injury.

The order finds for the months in question a demonstrated ability of claimant “to use his injured arm in a full functional capacity” until job termination for unrelated reasons. Appellant incorrectly argues that this finding, by application of “law of the case,” will bar future wage loss benefits. Appellee concedes that is not the case.

To avoid internal inconsistency in the order, such a finding clearly must be read in the light of or qualified by the adjudicated 8% permanent physical impairment, also accompanied in this case by continuing medical restrictions on functional activity. The quoted finding of “demonstrated ability” in accord with the usual standards for wage loss claims, Miller v. Richard Cole Roofing, 510 So.2d 1018 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), is confined strictly to the specific months and conditions then in question.

Affirmed.

MILLS and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

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

WENTWORTH, Judge.

Upon appeal by claimant, we affirm a workers’ compensation order denying a wage loss claim for lack of proof of causal relation to the compensable injury.

The order finds for the months in question a demonstrated ability of claimant “to use his injured arm in a full functional capacity” until job termination for unrelated reasons. Appellant incorrectly argues that this finding, by application of “law of the case,” will bar future wage loss benefits. Appellee concedes that is not the case.

To avoid internal inconsistency in the order, such a finding clearly must be read in the light of or qualified by the adjudicated 8% permanent physical impairment, also accompanied in this case by continuing medical restrictions on functional activity. The quoted finding of “demonstrated ability” in accord with the usual standards for wage loss claims, Miller v. Richard Cole Roofing, 510 So.2d 1018 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), is confined strictly to the specific months and conditions then in question.

Affirmed.

MILLS and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

510 So. 2d 1185, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1971, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 9774, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/powers-v-berti-ferguson-of-florida-fladistctapp-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack