You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Sun Lakes Realty & Construction Co. v. Taylor

Citations: 555 So. 2d 1216; 14 Fla. L. Weekly 400; 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 654; 1989 WL 10938Docket: No. 88-904

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; February 9, 1989; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves an appeal regarding a deputy commissioner's decision to grant disability benefits to a 25-year-old construction worker who sustained back injuries on two separate occasions while employed by different entities. Initially, the claimant received compensation from the first employer's insurance, but following a subsequent injury with a different employer, both insurers denied further benefits. The deputy commissioner ruled that the second injury was causally related to both incidents and ordered the second insurer to pay disability benefits, while also apportioning future liability for medical costs between the two carriers. This decision was supported by substantial evidence, affirming the apportionment of benefits, though it was specified that apportionment should not occur until maximum medical improvement is reached. The court affirmed the deputy's order and remanded the case for clarification on apportionment, ensuring the second insurer continues to provide benefits until the apportionment is resolved. Judges BOOTH, JOANOS, and MINER concurred with the ruling.

Legal Issues Addressed

Apportionment of Liability

Application: The court affirmed the deputy commissioner's authority to apportion future liability for compensation and medical benefits between the two insurance carriers, with specific instructions regarding the timing of apportionment.

Reasoning: The findings were supported by competent substantial evidence, affirming the deputy's authority to apportion benefits. However, it was noted that apportionment should not occur until the claimant reaches maximum medical improvement.

Causal Relationship Between Injuries

Application: The deputy commissioner found that the claimant's second injury had a causal connection to both the first and second incidents, thus impacting the liability of the insurance carriers.

Reasoning: The deputy commissioner determined that the second injury was causally related to both injuries and mandated E/C No. 2 to pay temporary total and partial disability benefits of $1,000.

Remand for Clarification

Application: The case was remanded to clarify the apportionment issue, ensuring E/C No. 2 continues to provide benefits until apportionment is accurately determined.

Reasoning: The order was affirmed, and the case was remanded for clarification on the apportionment issue, requiring E/C No. 2 to provide benefits and cover medical costs until such apportionment is determined.

Temporary Total Disability Benefits

Application: The deputy commissioner ordered E/C No. 2 to pay temporary total disability benefits, addressing the claimant's entitlement following the second injury.

Reasoning: The deputy commissioner determined that the second injury was causally related to both injuries and mandated E/C No. 2 to pay temporary total and partial disability benefits of $1,000.