Narrative Opinion Summary
In this case, the employer and carrier, Regency Kawasaki, Sea Doo, Inc., and Gulf Atlantic Claims Services, Inc./FESA, appealed a compensation judge's decision mandating the payment of benefits to claimant John H. Sheppard following his industrial injury in January 1993. The injury was initially accepted as compensable, but after Sheppard sought permanent total disability benefits post-maximum medical improvement, the employer/carrier attempted to introduce a defense under Martin Co. v. Carpenter nearly a year later. The compensation judge struck this defense, citing its untimeliness under section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes, which requires a response within 14 days of receiving a petition for benefits. The judge applied the statute retroactively, viewing it as procedural, in line with the precedent set in Litvin v. St. Lucie County Sheriff's Department. As a result, the appellate court affirmed the judge's order, concluding that the statute did not alter substantive rights but merely the procedural process, thereby upholding the mandate for the employer/carrier to pay benefits to Sheppard.
Legal Issues Addressed
Consequences of Failing to Timely Deny Compensabilitysubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court affirmed that failing to timely deny compensability results in the carrier being deemed to have accepted the injury as compensable unless material facts not discoverable through reasonable investigation within the 120-day period are shown.
Reasoning: Failure to timely deny compensability means the carrier is deemed to have accepted the injury as compensable unless it can show material facts that could not have been discovered through reasonable investigation within the 120-day period.
Procedural Application of Statutessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court applied section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes, retroactively as a procedural statute to the claimant's 1993 accident, determining that it alters the process for determining rights without changing substantive rights or defenses.
Reasoning: The JCC determined that section 440.192(8), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1994), is procedural and applicable to the claimant's 1993 accident.
Timeliness of Defense under Section 440.192(8)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The employer/carrier's defense under Martin Co. v. Carpenter was struck for being untimely, as they failed to respond within the 14-day requirement set by section 440.192(8) after receiving a petition for benefits.
Reasoning: Nearly a year later, in February 1995, the employer/carrier raised the Martin v. Carpenter defense, which the JCC deemed untimely under section 440.192(8), requiring a response within 14 days of receiving a petition for benefits.