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.

Dementry v. Danis Shook Construction Co.

Citations: 587 So. 2d 611; 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 10011; 1991 WL 204619Docket: No. 90-3475

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; October 10, 1991; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves an appeal by John Dementry concerning a compensation order related to the award of attendant-care benefits. The appeal challenges two specific determinations by the judge of compensation claims: the number of hours awarded for attendant care and the wage rate applied to those hours. The court affirmed the determination of the hours based on competent substantial evidence provided by the treating physician. However, it found the wage determination to be erroneous. Under Florida Statutes Section 440.13(2)(g), when a family member quits their job to provide care, the value of that care should be calculated based on their previous employment earnings rather than the federal minimum wage. This was particularly relevant since Mrs. Dementry had left her job to care for the claimant. Due to the absence of evidence regarding the market rate for comparable community care services, the court reversed the wage decision and remanded the case for further proceedings to determine the appropriate rate. The order was affirmed in all other aspects, with Judges Shivers and Wentworth concurring in the decision.

Legal Issues Addressed

Attendant-Care Benefits under Florida Statutes Section 440.13(2)(g)

Application: The court applied the statute to determine that the value of attendant-care services should be based on the caregiver's former employment earnings if they have left their job to provide care.

Reasoning: The court finds the wage determination erroneous, citing Florida Statutes Section 440.13(2)(g), which states that if a family member providing care quits their job to do so, the value of that care should be based on their former employment earnings, not the federal minimum wage.

Market Rate for Comparable Community Care

Application: The case was remanded to establish the appropriate market rate for community care due to a lack of evidence on this point.

Reasoning: The court notes a lack of evidence for determining the market rate for comparable community care and thus reverses the wage decision, remanding the case for further proceedings to establish the appropriate market rate.

Substantial Evidence in Judicial Determinations

Application: The court affirmed the determination of the hours of care based on competent substantial evidence presented by the treating physician.

Reasoning: The court affirms the determination of hours based on competent substantial evidence.