Upjohn Home Health Care Services v. Covington

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Upjohn Home Health Care Services v. Covington

634 So. 2d 261, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 2876, 1994 WL 101088

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 30, 1994

DocketNo. 93-304

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 634 So. 2d 261 (Upjohn Home Health Care Services v. Covington) 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

Upjohn Home Health Care Services v. Covington, 634 So. 2d 261, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 2876, 1994 WL 101088 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We are asked to review a non-final order entered by a Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC), which rejected appellants’ contention that the statute of limitations bars appellee’s claim, determined that appellee sustained a compensable injury, and awarded attorney’s fees. Because the order is not final, we limit our review to the JCC’s finding of compensability and decide no other question. See generally Hines Electric v. McClure, 616 So.2d 132 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Fla.R.Work.Comp.P. 4.160(b)(3); Fla. RApp.P. 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iv).

At a hearing on May 29, 1992, the JCC delineated the issues by announcing, “The parties have graciously agreed that we would try only the question of the statute of limitations today.” R. 1. The JCC’s order, entered December 23,1992, not only decided the statute of limitations question, but also went on to find a compensable injury, deferring an actual award of benefits pending a determination of disability, and ordered attorney’s fees.

The parties are entitled to notice and an opportunity to present evidence on the issue of compensability. Neither the employee, the employer, nor the carrier adduced medical testimony at the hearing. Accordingly, we reverse the finding of compensability and remand for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

BARFIELD, WOLF and BENTON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We are asked to review a non-final order entered by a Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC), which rejected appellants’ contention that the statute of limitations bars appellee’s claim, determined that appellee sustained a compensable injury, and awarded attorney’s fees. Because the order is not final, we limit our review to the JCC’s finding of compensability and decide no other question. See generally Hines Electric v. McClure, 616 So.2d 132 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Fla.R.Work.Comp.P. 4.160(b)(3); Fla. RApp.P. 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iv).

At a hearing on May 29, 1992, the JCC delineated the issues by announcing, “The parties have graciously agreed that we would try only the question of the statute of limitations today.” R. 1. The JCC’s order, entered December 23,1992, not only decided the statute of limitations question, but also went on to find a compensable injury, deferring an actual award of benefits pending a determination of disability, and ordered attorney’s fees.

The parties are entitled to notice and an opportunity to present evidence on the issue of compensability. Neither the employee, the employer, nor the carrier adduced medical testimony at the hearing. Accordingly, we reverse the finding of compensability and remand for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

BARFIELD, WOLF and BENTON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

634 So. 2d 261, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 2876, 1994 WL 101088, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/upjohn-home-health-care-services-v-covington-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack