Spooner v. POMPYS TYPESETTING & PRINT & RISK ENTERPRISE MANAGEMENT

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Spooner v. POMPYS TYPESETTING & PRINT & RISK ENTERPRISE MANAGEMENT

48 So. 3d 92, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 16151, 2010 WL 4159170

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 25, 2010

Docket1D10-1535

StatusPublished

This text of 48 So. 3d 92 (Spooner v. POMPYS TYPESETTING & PRINT & RISK ENTERPRISE MANAGEMENT) 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

Spooner v. POMPYS TYPESETTING & PRINT & RISK ENTERPRISE MANAGEMENT, 48 So. 3d 92, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 16151, 2010 WL 4159170 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Claimant, Debbie Spooner, challenges an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) which provided alternative grounds for denying her claims for disability benefits. In the order on appeal, the JCC determined that Claimant was not entitled to permanent total disability benefits because Claimant failed to prove that her injury was catastrophic under the definition provided by section 440.02(34)(f), Florida Statutes (1997). The JCC also determined that Claimant was not entitled to temporary disability benefits because Claimant reached maximum medical improvement prior to the periods for which *93 benefits were sought. Because these findings are supported by competent, substantial evidence, we affirm the denial of Claimant’s request for benefits. However, the JCC’s alternative findings that Claimant failed to establish major contributing cause were an improper application of the law. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the denial of the claim for benefits and REMAND with directions to strike the findings concerning major contributing cause in the order.

WOLF, DAVIS, and WETHERELL, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Claimant, Debbie Spooner, challenges an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) which provided alternative grounds for denying her claims for disability benefits. In the order on appeal, the JCC determined that Claimant was not entitled to permanent total disability benefits because Claimant failed to prove that her injury was catastrophic under the definition provided by section 440.02(34)(f), Florida Statutes (1997). The JCC also determined that Claimant was not entitled to temporary disability benefits because Claimant reached maximum medical improvement prior to the periods for which *93 benefits were sought. Because these findings are supported by competent, substantial evidence, we affirm the denial of Claimant’s request for benefits. However, the JCC’s alternative findings that Claimant failed to establish major contributing cause were an improper application of the law. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the denial of the claim for benefits and REMAND with directions to strike the findings concerning major contributing cause in the order.

WOLF, DAVIS, and WETHERELL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 So. 3d 92, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 16151, 2010 WL 4159170, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spooner-v-pompys-typesetting-print-risk-enterprise-management-fladistctapp-2010.