Scherer & Sons, Inc. v. Hoepelman

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Scherer & Sons, Inc. v. Hoepelman

397 So. 2d 760, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 19677

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 30, 1981

DocketNo. TT-236

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 397 So. 2d 760 (Scherer & Sons, Inc. v. Hoepelman) 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

Scherer & Sons, Inc. v. Hoepelman, 397 So. 2d 760, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 19677 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Substantial competent evidence supports the deputy’s award of permanent partial disability benefits, and in that respect the order is AFFIRMED. The deputy disallowed the employer.and carrier reclassification and credit, on account of permanent partial disability benefits due and unpaid, for temporary total disability benefits which were not due but were paid by the carrier and accepted by claimant after claimant returned to the same work at the same salary. Insofar as the order denies reclassification of and credit for those benefits paid, the order is REVERSED and the case REMANDED to the deputy for further consideration in light of this court’s decision in Belam Florida Corp. v. Dardy, 397 So.2d 756 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Moreover, because there was a failure of compliance with Section 440.13(1), Florida Statutes (1977), and no showing of circumstances excusing compliance with that requirement for a request to the employer/carrier for medical services, and requiring medical reports to the carrier, the deputy erroneously required payment of the bill submitted by Dr. Mims, and in that respect the order is also REVERSED. Contrast Paradise Inn v. Regedus, 389 So.2d 342 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980).

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., and THOMPSON, JJ., and WOODIE A. LILES, (Retired), Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Substantial competent evidence supports the deputy’s award of permanent partial disability benefits, and in that respect the order is AFFIRMED. The deputy disallowed the employer.and carrier reclassification and credit, on account of permanent partial disability benefits due and unpaid, for temporary total disability benefits which were not due but were paid by the carrier and accepted by claimant after claimant returned to the same work at the same salary. Insofar as the order denies reclassification of and credit for those benefits paid, the order is REVERSED and the case REMANDED to the deputy for further consideration in light of this court’s decision in Belam Florida Corp. v. Dardy, 397 So.2d 756 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Moreover, because there was a failure of compliance with Section 440.13(1), Florida Statutes (1977), and no showing of circumstances excusing compliance with that requirement for a request to the employer/carrier for medical services, and requiring medical reports to the carrier, the deputy erroneously required payment of the bill submitted by Dr. Mims, and in that respect the order is also REVERSED. Contrast Paradise Inn v. Regedus, 389 So.2d 342 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980).

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., and THOMPSON, JJ., and WOODIE A. LILES, (Retired), Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

397 So. 2d 760, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 19677, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scherer-sons-inc-v-hoepelman-fladistctapp-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack