Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Venda WEST, Appellant, v. UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI and Gallagher Bassett Services, Appellees.
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
We deny Appellant's motion for rehearing. We grant Appellees' motion for rehearing to the extent that we withdraw the opinion issued on July 22, 2011, and substitute the following opinion in its place.
In this workers' compensation appeal and cross-appeal, Claimant and the Employer/Carrier (E/C) both challenge an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) that awarded some benefits and denied others. We affirm the order, except as to the following. First, we reverse the award of temporary partial disability benefits for the period from January 23, 2007, through March 3, 2008, because the JCC found Claimant reached maximum medical improvement before January 23, 2007. See § 440.15(4), Fla. Stat. (2005). Second, we reverse the portion of the award of costs and attorney's fees associated with the aforementioned award. Third, we reverse the denial of penalties on the late payment of temporary partial disability benefits for the period from November 5, 2005, through June 13, 2006, because an award of penalties on late payment of indemnity benefits is not discretionary, but mandatory. See § 440.20(6)(a), Fla. Stat. (2005); Bell v. Univ. of Fla., 652 So.2d 460 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). See generally Jones v. City of St. Petersburg, 46 So.3d 637 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (defining when penalties are due). Fourth, because the JCC failed to determine whether the claim for a plastic surgeon was properly before him, see Univ. of Miami v. West, 8 So.3d 1193, 1194 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009), we remand for a ruling on that issue and, should the JCC determine the claim was indeed properly before him, for a ruling on the merits of the claim for a plastic surgeon.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED for further proceedings as indicated herein.
PER CURIAM.
VAN NORTWICK, WETHERELL and ROWE, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 1D10–4658.
Decided: September 16, 2011
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)